DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Netezza vs. TimesTen vs. Transwarp Hippo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. EJDB vs. Netezza vs. TimesTen vs. Transwarp Hippo

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

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Cloud-native distributed Vector DBMS that supports storage, retrieval, and management of massive vector-based datasets

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Vector DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	8.59
Rank	#45	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	1.36
Rank	#161	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#386	Overall
	#14	Vector DBMS

Website

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

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

www.transwarp.cn/en/subproduct/hippo

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Softmotions

IBM

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2016

2012

2000

1998

2023

Current release

1703

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

1.0, May 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

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

server-less

Linux

included in appliance

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

Vector, Numeric and String

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

in-process shared library

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

C++
Java
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

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

Read/Write Locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role based access control and fine grained access rights

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

Recent citations in the news

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

provided by Google News

Roundup: Telehouse, Cloudera, Netezza, EMC
31 May 2024, Data Center Knowledge

IBM announces availability of the high-performance, cloud-native Netezza Performance Server as a Service on AWS
11 July 2023, IBM

AWS and IBM Netezza come out in support of Iceberg in table format face-off
1 August 2023, The Register

Migrating your Netezza data warehouse to Amazon Redshift | Amazon Web Services
27 May 2020, AWS Blog

Netezza Performance Server
12 August 2020, IBM

provided by Google News

Share this page