DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiriDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Atos Standard Common Repository  Xexclude from comparison	Lovefield  Xexclude from comparison	Microsoft Azure Table Storage  Xexclude from comparison	SiriDB  Xexclude from comparison
	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	Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript	A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets	Open Source Time Series DBMS
Primary database model	Document store Key-value store	Relational DBMS	Wide column store	Time Series DBMS
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart		Score 0.33 Rank #286   Overall #131   Relational DBMS	Score 4.04 Rank #77   Overall #6   Wide column stores	Score 0.07 Rank #378   Overall #42   Time Series DBMS
Website	atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository	google.github.io/­lovefield	azure.microsoft.com/­en-us/­services/­storage/­tables	siridb.com
Technical documentation		github.com/­google/­lovefield/­blob/­master/­docs/­spec_index.md		docs.siridb.com
Developer	Atos Convergence Creators	Google	Microsoft	Cesbit
Initial release	2016	2014	2012	2017
Current release	1703	2.1.12, February 2017
License Commercial or Open Source	commercial	Open Source Apache 2.0	commercial	Open Source MIT License
Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service	no	no	yes	no
DBaaS offerings (sponsored links) Database as a Service Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.
Implementation language	Java	JavaScript		C
Server operating systems	Linux	server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js) tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari	hosted	Linux
Data scheme	Schema and schema-less with LDAP views	yes	schema-free	yes
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	optional	yes	yes	yes Numeric data
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	no	no	no
Secondary indexes	yes	yes	no	yes
SQL Support of SQL	no	SQL-like query language via JavaScript builder pattern	no	no
APIs and other access methods	LDAP		RESTful HTTP API	HTTP API
Supported programming languages	All languages with LDAP bindings	JavaScript	.Net C# C++ Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python Ruby	C C++ Go Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python R
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no	no	no	no
Triggers	yes	Using read-only observers	no	no
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding cell division	none	Sharding Implicit feature of the cloud service	Sharding
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	yes	none	yes implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.	yes
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods		no	no	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration		Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no	yes	no	no
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	Atomic execution of specific operations	ACID	optimistic locking	no
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes	yes	yes	yes
Durability Support for making data persistent	yes	yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database	yes	yes
In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.	yes	yes using MemoryDB	no	yes
User concepts Access control	LDAP bind authentication	no	Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures	simple rights management via user accounts
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
	Atos Standard Common Repository	Lovefield	Microsoft Azure Table Storage	SiriDB
Recent citations in the news			Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes 7 March 2024, Simplilearn How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB 9 July 2021, hackernoon.com How to use Azure Table storage in .Net 14 January 2019, InfoWorld How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function 14 April 2017, Experts Exchange Inside Azure File Storage 7 October 2015, Microsoft provided by Google News

Share this page