DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. MaxDB vs. SQLite vs. Titan

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. MaxDB vs. SQLite vs. Titan

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.

Titan has been decommisioned after the takeover by Datastax. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking. A fork has been open-sourced as JanusGraph.

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

A robust and reliable RDBMS optimized to run all major SAP solutions

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Titan is a Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters.

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	2.32
Rank	#112	Overall
	#55	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

maxdb.sap.com

www.sqlite.org

github.com/thinkaurelius/titan

Technical documentation

maxdb.sap.com/documentation

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/wiki

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

SAP, acquired from Software AG (Adabas-D) in 1997

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Aurelius, owned by DataStax

Initial release

2016

1984

2000

2012

Current release

1703

7.9.10.12, February 2024

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Limited community edition free

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache license, version 2.0

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

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

dynamic column types

yes

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
ODBC
WebDAV

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C#
Java
Perl
PHP
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

Clojure
Java
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

yes

via pluggable storage backends

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graph

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

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

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

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

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.