DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Graph Engine vs. SiteWhere vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Graph Engine vs. SiteWhere vs. TempoIQ

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

A distributed reliable key-value store

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems
Trend Chart

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#356	Overall
	#35	Time Series DBMS

Website

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.graphengine.io

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

SiteWhere

TempoIQ

Initial release

2016

2010

2012

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

.NET and C

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

.NET

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

predefined scheme

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

XML support

Some form of processing data in XML format, e.g. support for XML data structures, and/or support for XPath, XQuery or XSLT.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

simple authentication-based access control

More information provided by the system vendor

We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
and for displaying vendor-provided information such as key customers, competitive advantages and market metrics.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Mint
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

Public preview: AKS cluster control plane metrics in managed Prometheus | Azure updates
12 February 2024, Microsoft

provided by Google News

Trinity
2 June 2023, Microsoft

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

The graph analytics landscape 2019 - DataScienceCentral.com
27 February 2019, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page