DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. LevelDB vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. LevelDB vs. Stardog

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

Cloud-based data warehousing service

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	1.30
Rank	#164	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

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

www.ibm.com/products/db2/warehouse

github.com/google/leveldb

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

IBM

Google

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2016

2014

2011

2010

Current release

1703

1.23, February 2021

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

PL/SQL, SQL PL

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

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

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

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

with automatic compression on writes

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

Access rights for users and roles

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

Announcing the deprecation of prior generation Db2 Warehouse plans on AWS
16 October 2023, IBM

Introducing the next generation of Db2 Warehouse: Our cost-effective, cloud-native data warehouse built for always-on ...
11 July 2023, IBM

Top 7 Cloud Data Warehouse Companies
31 May 2023, Datamation

Db2 Warehouse delivers 4x faster query performance than previously, while cutting storage costs by 34x
11 July 2023, IBM

Data mining in Db2 Warehouse: the basics
23 June 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

LevelDB in Ruby — SitePoint
22 October 2014, SitePoint

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks & Files

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Rust-Based Info Stealers Abuse GitHub Codespaces
19 May 2023, Trend Micro

provided by Google News

Share this page