DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. SQLite vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. SQLite vs. Transbase

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.sqlite.org

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2016

2000

1987

Current release

1703

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

free development license

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 and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
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

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

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

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

yes

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

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.