DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Informix vs. SQLite vs. Transwarp Hippo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Informix vs. SQLite vs. Transwarp Hippo

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

A secure embeddable database from IBM, positioned besides IBM Db2 as a relatively low-cost product optimized for OLTP and Internet of Things data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Cloud-native distributed Vector DBMS that supports storage, retrieval, and management of massive vector-based datasets

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Since Version 12.10 support for JSON/BSON datatypes compatible with MongoDB

Relational DBMS

Vector DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

with Informix TimeSeries Extension

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

Score	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	17.12
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#386	Overall
	#14	Vector DBMS

Website

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

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

www.ibm.com/products/informix

www.sqlite.org

www.transwarp.cn/en/subproduct/hippo

Technical documentation

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

informix.hcldoc.com
www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSGU8G/welcomeIfxServers.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

IBM, HCL Technologies

Effective May 1st, 2017, HCL took on development, technical support, and product management teams, and works jointly with IBM on product strategy, marketing, and sales.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

1984

2000

2023

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

14.10.FC5, November 2020

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

1.0, May 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free developer edition available

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

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, C++ and Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

Since Version 12.10 support for JSON/BSON datatypes

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

Vector, Numeric and String

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

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JDBC
JSON API

MongoDB compatible
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

RESTful HTTP API

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

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

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

C++
Java
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

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.

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

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

via file-system locks

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

Users with fine-grained authentication, authorization, and auditing controls

Role based access control and fine grained access rights

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.