DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. LevelDB vs. Prometheus vs. searchxml vs. ToroDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. LevelDB vs. Prometheus vs. searchxml vs. ToroDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. 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

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

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Document store

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

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	7.69
Rank	#50	Overall
	#3	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#390	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#24	Search engines

Website

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

github.com/google/leveldb

prometheus.io

www.searchxml.net/category/products

github.com/torodb/server

Technical documentation

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

prometheus.io/docs

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

informationpartners gmbh

8Kdata

Initial release

2016

2011

2015

2016

Current release

1703

1.23, February 2021

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

AGPL-V3

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++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

Windows

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

Numeric data only

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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 of XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

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

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

on the application server

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

by Federation

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

Source-replica replication

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

none

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

multiple readers, single writer

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

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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

Malicious npm 'colors' typosquats pack Discord malware
3 May 2022, Sonatype Blog

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

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

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

Threat Thursday: BlackGuard Infostealer Rises from Russian Underground Markets
21 April 2022, BlackBerry Blog

provided by Google News

VTEX scales to 150 million metrics using Amazon Managed Service for Prometheus | Amazon Web Services
10 March 2024, AWS Blog

Exadata Real-Time Insight - Quick Start
3 April 2024, Oracle

OpenTelemetry vs. Prometheus: You can’t fix what you can’t see
29 March 2024, IBM

VictoriaMetrics Offers Prometheus Replacement for Time Series Monitoring
17 July 2023, The New Stack

Linux System Monitoring with Prometheus, Grafana, and collectd
1 February 2024, Linux Journal

provided by Google News

Share this page