DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Badger vs. SAP HANA vs. Tkrzw

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Badger vs. SAP HANA vs. Tkrzw

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

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

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

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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	0.22
Rank	#320	Overall
	#47	Key-value stores

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#372	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Website

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

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

dbmx.net/tkrzw

Technical documentation

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

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

DGraph Labs

SAP

Mikio Hirabayashi

Initial release

2016

2017

2010

2020

Current release

1703

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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++

Server operating systems

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Appliance or cloud-service

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

none

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

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

using specific database classes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

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.