DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. Manticore Search vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. Manticore Search vs. STSdb

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

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

Multi-storage database for search, including full-text search.

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Search engine

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

using the Manticore Columnar Library

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

Score	0.22
Rank	#312	Overall
	#21	Search engines

Score	0.04
Rank	#360	Overall
	#52	Key-value stores

Website

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

manticoresearch.com

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

manual.manticoresearch.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Manticore Software

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2016

2008

2017

2011

Current release

1703

7.2.4, September 2012

6.0, February 2023

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GPL version 2

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license 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++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Windows

Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

Fixed schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

Int, Bigint, Float, Timestamp, Bit, Int array, Bigint array, JSON, Boolean

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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

Can index from XML

Secondary indexes

yes

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC

Binary API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful HTTP/SQL API
SQL over MySQL

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C++
Java
PHP

Elixir
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Partitioning is done manually, search queries against distributed index is supported

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Synchronous replication based on Galera library

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

yes

isolated transactions for atomic changes and binary logging for safe writes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

The original contents of fields are not stored in the Manticore index.

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

LDAP bind authentication

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

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

Integrating Manticore Search with Apache Superset
8 August 2023, hackernoon.com

Clickhouse vs Elasticsearch vs Manticore Search Query Times With a 1.7B NYC Taxi Rides Benchmark
1 June 2022, hackernoon.com

8 Powerful Alternatives to Elasticsearch
25 April 2024, Insider Monkey

Manticore is a Faster Alternative to Elasticsearch in C++
25 July 2022, hackernoon.com

8 Google Alternatives: How to Search Crypto, the Dark Web, More
1 February 2023, Gizmodo

provided by Google News

Share this page