DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HarperDB vs. PostGIS vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HarperDB vs. PostGIS vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB

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

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Spatial extension of PostgreSQL

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	21.72
Rank	#29	Overall
	#1	Spatial DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#364	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

www.harperdb.io

postgis.net

www.snowflake.com

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

Technical documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

postgis.net/documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

HarperDB

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2017

2005

2014

2020

Current release

1703

3.1, August 2021

3.4.2, February 2024

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

GPL v2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3

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

Node.js

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

dynamic schema

yes

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

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

yes

based on PostgreSQL

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

yes

based on PostgreSQL

yes

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

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

yes, using LMDB

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 and roles

yes

based on PostgreSQL

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

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.