DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. GridDB vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. GridDB vs. SWC-DB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and 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

Scalable in-memory time series database optimized for IoT and Big Data

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	7.05
Rank	#53	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	1.91
Rank	#123	Overall
	#10	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#378	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

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

griddb.net

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

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

docs.griddb.net

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Toshiba Corporation

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2013

2020

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

5.1, August 2022

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3 and Apache License, version 2.0 , commercial license (standard and advanced editions) also available

Open Source

GPL V3

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

numerical, string, blob, geometry, boolean, timestamp

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

SQL92, SQL-like TQL (Toshiba Query Language)

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

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++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

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.

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Connector for using GridDB as an input source and output destination for Hadoop MapReduce jobs

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency within container, eventual consistency across containers

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID at container level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Access rights for users can be defined per database

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

ETCD guidelines: RBI seeks to balance rupee stability, competitiveness | Policy Circle
8 April 2024, Policy Circle

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

Is Your etcd an Open Door for Cyber Attacks? How to Secure Your Kubernetes Clusters & Nodes
8 November 2023, Information Security Newspaper

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

6 Cool Kubernetes Operators and How to Use Them
22 January 2024, hackernoon.com

provided by Google News

TOSHIBA DIGITAL SOLUTIONS CORPORATION
1 November 2020, global.toshiba

Toshiba launches cloudy managed IoT database service running its own GridDB
8 April 2021, The Register

Now Features Scale-Out and Scale-Up combo for Petabyte-scale Data Management
3 December 2019, global.toshiba

Amazon Proposes to Develop New Data Center Campus in Virginia
26 August 2022, w.media

’s SQL Interface, Aims to Accelerate Open Innovation
17 June 2020, global.toshiba

provided by Google News

2022 All O-Zone Football Team
17 December 2022, Ozarks Sports Zone

provided by Google News

Share this page