DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. OpenTSDB vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Drizzle vs. OpenTSDB vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

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.

Scalable Time Series DBMS based on HBase

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Document store

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

Score	1.68
Rank	#146	Overall
	#12	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.52
Rank	#254	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Website

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

opentsdb.net

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

Technical documentation

opentsdb.net/docs/build/html/index.html

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

currently maintained by Yahoo and other contributors

Percona

Initial release

2016

2008

2011

2015

Current release

1703

7.2.4, September 2012

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

LGPL

Open Source

GPL Version 2

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++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

numeric data for metrics, strings for tags

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

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC

HTTP API
Telnet API

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C
C++
Java
PHP

Erlang
Go
Java
Python
R
Ruby

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

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

based on HBase

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

based on HBase

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

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

via In-Memory Engine

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

Time Series DBMS are the database category with the fastest increase in popularity
4 July 2016, 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

Pinterest Switches from OpenTSDB to Their Own Time Series Database
16 September 2018, InfoQ.com

Brain Monitoring with Kafka, OpenTSDB, and Grafana
5 August 2016, KDnuggets

Comparing Different Time-Series Databases
10 February 2022, hackernoon.com

MapR to help admins peer into dense Hadoop clusters
28 June 2016, SiliconANGLE News

LogicMonitor Rolls a Time Series Database for Finer-Grain Reporting
1 June 2016, The New Stack

provided by Google News

MongoDB Performance Tuning
23 May 2024, Database Trends and Applications

5 Reasons to Run MongoDB on Kubernetes
6 March 2024, The New Stack

How to Plan Your MongoDB Upgrade
29 January 2024, The New Stack

FerretDB goes GA: Gives you MongoDB, without the MongoDB...
15 May 2023, The Stack

DB or not DB: Open-sourcer Percona pushes out plethora of SQL and NoSQL tweaks in bid to win over suits
19 May 2020, The Register

provided by Google News

Share this page