DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. OrientDB vs. SWC-DB vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. OrientDB vs. SWC-DB vs. Valentina Server

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

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	3.27
Rank	#97	Overall
	#16	Document stores
	#6	Graph DBMS
	#15	Key-value stores

Score	0.01
Rank	#387	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Score	0.18
Rank	#329	Overall
	#144	Relational DBMS

Website

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

orientdb.org

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

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

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

OrientDB LTD; CallidusCloud; SAP

Alex Kashirin

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2016

2010

2020

1999

Current release

1703

3.2.29, March 2024

0.5, April 2021

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

Open Source

GPL V3

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

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

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

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

schema-free

yes

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, no joins

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

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

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

C++

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java, Javascript

yes

Triggers

yes

Hooks

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

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

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

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

Access rights for users and roles; record level security configurable

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

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

2022 All O-Zone Football Team
17 December 2022, Ozarks Sports Zone

provided by Google News

A Look at Valentina — SitePoint
18 April 2014, SitePoint

MySQL GUI Tools for Windows and Ubuntu/Linux: Top 8 free or open source
7 December 2018, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page