DBMS > Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. IBM Db2 Event Store vs. SAP HANA

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

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

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

Distributed Event Store optimized for Internet of Things use cases

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Event Store
Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.02
Rank	#124	Overall
	#22	Document stores
	#59	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#309	Overall
	#2	Event Stores
	#28	Time Series DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

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

www.ibm.com/products/db2-event-store

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2-event-store

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Atos Convergence Creators

IBM

SAP

Initial release

2012

2016

2017

2010

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

1703

2.0

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

commercial

free developer edition available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based 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
OS X
Windows

Linux

Linux, macOS, Windows for the developer addition

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

schema-free

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

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 SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

through the embedded Spark runtime

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

LDAP

ADO.NET
DB2 Connect
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Active-active shard replication

yes

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

Eventual Consistency

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

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

No - written data is immutable

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

Yes - Synchronous writes to local disk combined with replication and asynchronous writes in parquet format to permanent shared storage

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

LDAP bind authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

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.