DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. chDB vs. Drizzle vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. chDB vs. Drizzle vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Atos Standard Common Repository  Xexclude from comparison	chDB  Xexclude from comparison	Drizzle  Xexclude from comparison	Microsoft Azure Table Storage  Xexclude from comparison
	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 embedded SQL OLAP Engine powered by ClickHouse	MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.	A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets
Primary database model	Document store Key-value store	Relational DBMS	Relational DBMS	Wide column store
Secondary database models		Time Series DBMS
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart		Score 0.07 Rank #376   Overall #158   Relational DBMS		Score 4.04 Rank #77   Overall #6   Wide column stores
Website	atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository	github.com/­chdb-io/­chdb		azure.microsoft.com/­en-us/­services/­storage/­tables
Technical documentation		doc.chdb.io
Developer	Atos Convergence Creators		Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker	Microsoft
Initial release	2016	2023	2008	2012
Current release	1703		7.2.4, September 2012
License Commercial or Open Source	commercial	Open Source Apache Version 2.0	Open Source GNU GPL	commercial
Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service	no	no	no	yes
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	server-less	FreeBSD Linux OS X	hosted
Data scheme	Schema and schema-less with LDAP views		yes	schema-free
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	optional		yes	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			no
Secondary indexes	yes		yes	no
SQL Support of SQL	no	Close to ANSI SQL (SQL/JSON + extensions)	yes with proprietary extensions	no
APIs and other access methods	LDAP		JDBC	RESTful HTTP API
Supported programming languages	All languages with LDAP bindings	Bun C C++ Go JavaScript (Node.js) Python Rust	C C++ Java PHP	.Net C# C++ Java JavaScript (Node.js) PHP Python Ruby
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no		no	no
Triggers	yes		no hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.	no
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding cell division		Sharding	Sharding Implicit feature of the cloud service
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	yes		Multi-source replication Source-replica replication	yes implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods			no	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration			Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no		yes	no
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	Atomic execution of specific operations		ACID	optimistic locking
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes		yes	yes
Durability Support for making data persistent	yes		yes	yes
In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.	yes			no
User concepts Access control	LDAP bind authentication		Pluggable authentication mechanisms e.g. LDAP, HTTP	Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures
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
	Atos Standard Common Repository	chDB	Drizzle	Microsoft Azure Table Storage
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			Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes 7 March 2024, Simplilearn How to use Azure Table storage in .Net 14 January 2019, InfoWorld How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB 9 July 2021, hackernoon.com Inside Azure File Storage 7 October 2015, azure.microsoft.com How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function 14 April 2017, Experts Exchange provided by Google News

Share this page