DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Badger vs. Drizzle vs. HarperDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Badger vs. Drizzle 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.

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

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
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Website

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

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.harperdb.io

Technical documentation

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

DGraph Labs

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

HarperDB

Initial release

2016

2017

2008

2017

Current release

1703

7.2.4, September 2012

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GNU GPL

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

Java

C++

Node.js

Server operating systems

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
OS X

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C++
Java
PHP

.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

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

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

yes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

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

none

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

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

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Infographic: What makes a Mobile Operator's setup future proof?
10 February 2024, Atos

provided by Google News

Meet HarperDB, Winner of the Startups of the Year in Denver
9 February 2024, hackernoon.com

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

Unlocking immersive golfing experiences with AWS Wavelength | Amazon Web Services
29 November 2022, AWS Blog

Stephen Goldberg Named 2023 Bill Daniels Ethical Leader of the Year | CU Denver Business School News
9 January 2023, business-news.ucdenver.edu

HarperDB: An underdog SQL / NoSQL database | ZDNET
7 February 2018, ZDNet

provided by Google News

Share this page