DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Linter vs. Snowflake vs. SQLite vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Linter vs. Snowflake vs. SQLite vs. Warp 10

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

RDBMS for high security requirements

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#349	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

Technical documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

relex.ru

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

SenX

Initial release

2016

1990

2014

2000

2015

Current release

1703

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

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 and C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

hosted

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

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

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

user defined functions

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

yes

none

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

none

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

based on HBase

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.