DBMS > Altibase vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. CouchDB

System Properties Comparison Altibase vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. CouchDB

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

An enterprise grade, high-performance RDBMS

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

A native JSON - document store inspired by Lotus Notes, scalable from globally distributed server-clusters down to mobile phones.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension

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

Score	1.07
Rank	#186	Overall
	#87	Relational DBMS

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	9.30
Rank	#45	Overall
	#7	Document stores

Website

altibase.com

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

couchdb.apache.org

Technical documentation

github.com/ALTIBASE/Documents/tree/master/Manuals

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.couchdb.org/en/stable

Developer

Altibase

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Apache Software Foundation

Apache top-level project, originally developed by Damien Katz, a former Lotus Notes developer

Initial release

1999

2012

2016

2005

Current release

v7.3, 2023, August 2023

1703

3.3.3, December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open source edition discontinued with March 2023

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

Java

Erlang

Server operating systems

AIX
HP-UX
Linux

hosted

Linux

Android
BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

restricted

yes

via views

SQL

Support of SQL

ANSI SQL-92

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary protocol

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
ColdFusion
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

stored procedures and stored functions

user defined functions

in Python

View functions in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

improved architecture with release 2.0

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

atomic operations within a single document possible

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

strategy: optimistic locking

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights for users can be defined 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.