DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. TimescaleDB

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.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

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

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.04
Rank	#374	Overall
	#38	Time Series DBMS

Score	4.87
Rank	#74	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

www.hawkular.org

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

www.hawkular.org/hawkular-metrics/docs/user-guide

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

FatCloud

Community supported by Red Hat

Timescale

Initial release

2016

2012

2014

2017

Current release

1703

2.13.0, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Windows

Linux
OS X
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

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

HTTP REST

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

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Go
Java
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

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

via applications

yes

via Hawkular Alerting

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

based on Cassandra

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

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

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS
5 June 2019, DevClass

provided by Google News

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

TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL to power IoT and time-series workloads | Azure updates
18 March 2019, azure.microsoft.com

Visualizing IoT Data at Scale With Hopara and TimescaleDB
16 May 2023, Embedded Computing Design

Timescale Announces Corporate Rebrand Reflecting Company's Growth
17 May 2023, PR Newswire

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

provided by Google News

Share this page