DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Oracle Rdb vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. FatDB vs. Oracle Rdb vs. SAP HANA

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.

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.14
Rank	#178	Overall
	#80	Relational DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

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

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

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb-doc.html

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

FatCloud

Oracle, originally developed by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)

SAP

Initial release

2016

2012

1984

2010

Current release

1703

7.4.1.1, 2021

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based 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

HP Open VMS

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

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

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

yes

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

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, on a single node

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

yes

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.