DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. OrientDB vs. searchxml

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. OrientDB vs. searchxml

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Multi-model DBMS (Document, Graph, Key/Value)

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	3.19
Rank	#93	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#7	Graph DBMS
	#14	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Website

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

google.github.io/lovefield

orientdb.org

www.searchxml.net/category/products

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.orientdb.com/docs/last/index.html

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

informationpartners gmbh

Initial release

2016

2014

2010

2015

Current release

1703

2.1.12, February 2017

3.2.29, March 2024

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache version 2

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

JavaScript

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

All OS with a Java JDK (>= JDK 6)

Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

Schema can be enforced for whole record ("schema-full") or for some fields only ("schema-hybrid")

schema-free

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language, no joins

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Tinkerpop technology stack with Blueprints, Gremlin, Pipes
Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

JavaScript

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

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java, Javascript

yes

on the application server

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Multi-source replication

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

could be achieved with distributed queries

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

relationship in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

multiple readers, single writer

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

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

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Graph DBMS increased their popularity by 500% within the last 2 years
3 March 2015, Paul Andlinger

Graph DBMSs are gaining in popularity faster than any other database category
21 January 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

The 12 Best Graph Databases to Consider for 2024
22 October 2023, Solutions Review

OrientDB: A Flexible and Scalable Multi-Model NoSQL DBMS
21 January 2022, Open Source For You

Comparing Graph Databases II. Part 2: ArangoDB, OrientDB, and… | by Sam Bell
20 September 2019, Towards Data Science

ArangoDB raises $10 million for NoSQL database management
14 March 2019, VentureBeat

K2View updates DataOps platform with data fabric automation
11 May 2021, TechTarget

provided by Google News

Share this page