DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Heroic vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. SwayDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Heroic vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. SwayDB

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

Time Series DBMS built at Spotify based on Cassandra or Google Cloud Bigtable, and ElasticSearch

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

An embeddable, non-blocking, type-safe key-value store for single or multiple disks and in-memory storage

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	0.46
Rank	#265	Overall
	#22	Time Series DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.60
Rank	#246	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Score	0.04
Rank	#387	Overall
	#61	Key-value stores

Website

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

github.com/spotify/heroic

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

swaydb.simer.au

Technical documentation

spotify.github.io/heroic

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Spotify

Microsoft

Percona

Simer Plaha

Initial release

2016

2014

2012

2015

2018

Current release

1703

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL Version 2

Open Source

GNU Affero GPL V3.0

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C++

Scala

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

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

via Elasticsearch

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

HQL (Heroic Query Language, a JSON-based language)
HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

Java
Kotlin
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

none

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

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

Atomic execution of specific operations

optimistic locking

Atomic execution of operations

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

via In-Memory Engine

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Access rights for users and roles

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

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

Inside Azure File Storage
7 October 2015, Microsoft

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

provided by Google News

Percona launches management system aimed at open-source databases
17 May 2022, The Register

FerretDB goes GA: Gives you MongoDB, without the MongoDB...
15 May 2023, The Stack

The essential guide to MongoDB security
2 February 2017, InfoWorld

The Case Against the Server Side Public License (SSPL)
11 October 2022, The New Stack

Supercharge your Amazon RDS for MySQL deployment with ProxySQL and Percona Monitoring and Management ...
12 October 2018, AWS Blog

provided by Google News

Share this page