DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Heroic vs. MonetDB vs. SwayDB vs. Trafodion

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Heroic vs. MonetDB vs. SwayDB vs. Trafodion

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Apache Trafodion has been retired in 2021. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

A relational database management system that stores data in columns

An embeddable, non-blocking, type-safe key-value store for single or multiple disks and in-memory storage

Transactional SQL-on-Hadoop DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.46
Rank	#265	Overall
	#22	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#141	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#387	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores

Website

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

github.com/spotify/heroic

www.monetdb.org

swaydb.simer.au

trafodion.apache.org

Technical documentation

spotify.github.io/heroic

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

trafodion.apache.org/documentation.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Spotify

MonetDB BV

Simer Plaha

Apache Software Foundation, originally developed by HP

Initial release

2016

2014

2004

2018

2014

Current release

1703

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

2.3.0, February 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 2.0

Open Source

GNU Affero GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Scala

C++, Java

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

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

via Elasticsearch

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL 2003 with some extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

Java
Kotlin
Scala

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes, in SQL, C, R

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Sharding via remote tables

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

none

yes, via HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via user defined functions and HBase

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

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

Atomic execution of 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

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind 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.

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

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

In 2024 the MonetDB Foundation was established for the preservation, maintenance and further development of the ...
31 January 2024, Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica (CWI)

MonetDB Secures Investment From (and Partners With) ServiceNow
9 December 2021, Datanami

PostgreSQL, MonetDB, and Too-Big-for-Memory Data in R - Part I - DataScienceCentral.com
6 April 2018, Data Science Central

How MonetDB Exploits Modern CPU Performance | by Dwi Prasetyo Adi Nugroho
14 January 2020, Towards Data Science

PostgreSQL, MonetDB, and Too-Big-for-Memory Data in R - Part II - DataScienceCentral.com
13 June 2018, Data Science Central

provided by Google News

SQL-on-Hadoop Database Trafodion Bridges Transactions and Analysis
24 January 2018, The New Stack

Evaluating HTAP Databases for Machine Learning Applications
2 November 2016, KDnuggets

Low-latency, distributed database architectures are critical for emerging fog applications
7 April 2022, Embedded Computing Design

provided by Google News

Share this page