DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hive vs. SwayDB vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hive vs. SwayDB 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.

Description

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

data warehouse software for querying and managing large distributed datasets, built on Hadoop

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

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

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	62.59
Rank	#18	Overall
	#12	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#373	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Score	4.87
Rank	#74	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

hive.apache.org

swaydb.simer.au

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/Hive/Home

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Apache Software Foundation

initially developed by Facebook

Simer Plaha

Timescale

Initial release

2016

2012

2018

2017

Current release

1703

3.1.3, April 2022

2.13.0, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

GNU Affero GPL V3.0

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

Scala

Server operating systems

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

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

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift

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

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Java
PHP
Python

Java
Kotlin
Scala

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions and integration of map-reduce

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

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

none

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

none

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

query execution via MapReduce

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual 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

Atomic execution of 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

Access rights for users, groups and roles

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

DB-Engines blog posts

Why is Hadoop not listed in the DB-Engines Ranking?
13 May 2013, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Run Apache Hive workloads using Spark SQL with Amazon EMR on EKS | Amazon Web Services
18 October 2023, AWS Blog

Data Engineering in 2024: Predictions For Data Lakes and The Serving Layer
23 January 2024, Datanami

18 Top Big Data Tools and Technologies to Know About in 2024
24 January 2024, TechTarget

Top 80 Hadoop Interview Questions and Answers for 2024
15 February 2024, Simplilearn

What Is Apache Iceberg?
26 February 2024, ibm.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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page