DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. RavenDB vs. SQLite vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. RavenDB vs. SQLite vs. SWC-DB

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

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

ravendb.net

www.sqlite.org

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

Technical documentation

ravendb.net/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Hibernating Rhinos

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2016

2010

2000

2020

Current release

1703

5.4, July 2022

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

GPL V3

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

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

server-less

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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 (RQL)

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C#
F#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.