DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HarperDB vs. Infobright vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. HarperDB vs. Infobright 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

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	0.96
Rank	#194	Overall
	#91	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.harperdb.io

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

HarperDB

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2016

2017

2005

2009

Current release

1703

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

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

Node.js

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X

Linux
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

dynamic schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

JSON 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

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

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

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

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

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

Startups of the Year 2023: Meet HarperDB - A Database and Application Development Platform
22 June 2023, hackernoon.com

Unlocking immersive golfing experiences with AWS Wavelength | Amazon Web Services
29 November 2022, AWS Blog

HarperDB: An underdog SQL / NoSQL database | ZDNET
7 February 2018, ZDNet

HarperDB is More Than Just a Database: Here's Why
21 August 2021, hackernoon.com

Stephen Goldberg Named 2023 Bill Daniels Ethical Leader of the Year | CU Denver Business School News
9 January 2023, University of Colorado Denver

provided by Google News

Share this page