DBMS > AlaSQL vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EsgynDB vs. HarperDB

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EsgynDB vs. HarperDB

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

JavaScript DBMS library

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

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

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

Score	0.51
Rank	#256	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#118	Relational DBMS

Score	0.25
Rank	#312	Overall
	#138	Relational DBMS

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Website

alasql.org

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

www.esgyn.cn

www.harperdb.io

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

Atos Convergence Creators

Esgyn

HarperDB

Initial release

2014

2016

2015

2017

Current release

1703

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

commercial

free community edition available

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

JavaScript

Java

C++, Java

Node.js

Server operating systems

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

Linux

Linux
OS X

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

dynamic schema

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

JSON data types

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

Close to SQL99, but no user access control, stored procedures and host language bindings.

yes

SQL-like data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

All languages with LDAP bindings

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

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

yes

only for local storage and DOM-storage

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using IndexedDB, SQL.JS or proprietary FileStorage

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

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

Recent citations in the news

Create a Marvel Database with SQL and Javascript, the easy way
2 July 2019, Towards Data Science

Multi faceted data exploration in the browser using Leaflet and amCharts
3 May 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Serent Capital invests in software firm HarperDB
12 June 2024, PE Hub

HarperDB Attracts Significant Growth Investment from Serent Capital
12 June 2024, Business Wire

HarperDB Receives Growth Investment from Serent Capital
12 June 2024, FinSMEs

Startups of the Year 2023: Meet HarperDB - A Database and Application Development Platform
22 June 2023, hackernoon.com

Jaxon Repp on HarperDB Distributed Database Platform
23 March 2022, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

Share this page