DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GridGain vs. Snowflake vs. Tkrzw vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GridGain vs. Snowflake vs. Tkrzw vs. Yaacomo

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

GridGain is an in-memory computing platform, built on Apache Ignite

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.47
Rank	#154	Overall
	#26	Key-value stores
	#72	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

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

www.gridgain.com

www.snowflake.com

dbmx.net/tkrzw

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.gridgain.com/docs/index.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

GridGain Systems, Inc.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Mikio Hirabayashi

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

2007

2014

2020

2009

Current release

1703

GridGain 8.5.1

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

Java, C++, .Net

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux
macOS

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

yes

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

ANSI-99 for query and DML statements, subset of DDL

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

HDFS API
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
C++
Java
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes (compute grid and cache interceptors can be used instead)

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

yes (cache interceptors and events)

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes (replicated cache)

yes

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes (compute grid and hadoop accelerator)

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

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

using specific database classes

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Security Hooks for custom implementations

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.