DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. TimescaleDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Ehcache vs. TimescaleDB vs. Yaacomo

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.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.89
Rank	#67	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Score	4.64
Rank	#71	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

www.ehcache.org

www.timescale.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.ehcache.org/documentation

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Timescale

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

2009

2017

2009

Current release

1703

3.10.0, March 2022

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
OS X
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JCache

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Java

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

by using Terracotta Server

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

Source-replica replication

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

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

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

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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

Ehcache 2.0: Write-Behind Caching and JTA Support
11 May 2010, InfoQ.com

Atlassian asks customers to patch critical Jira vulnerability
22 July 2021, BleepingComputer

Hazelcast signs Java speed king to its in-memory data-grid crew
21 January 2014, The Register

Critical Jira Flaw in Atlassian Could Lead to RCE
22 July 2021, Threatpost

Scaling Australia's Most Popular Online News Sites with Ehcache
6 December 2010, InfoQ.com

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB Is a Vector Database Now, Too
25 September 2023, Datanami

Timescale Acquires PopSQL to Bring a Modern, Collaborative SQL GUI to PostgreSQL Developers
4 April 2024, PR Newswire

Power IoT and time-series workloads with TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL
18 March 2019, Microsoft

Timescale Valuation Rockets to Over $1B with $110M Round, Marking the Explosive Rise of Time-Series Data
22 February 2022, Business Wire

Timescale announces $15M investment and new enterprise version of TimescaleDB
29 January 2019, TechCrunch

provided by Google News

Share this page