DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Our visitors often compare Atos Standard Common Repository and Hypertable with MongoDB, MySQL and SQLite.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 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

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Website

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

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Hypertable Inc.

Initial release

2016

2009

Current release

1703

0.9.8.11, March 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

SQL

Support of SQL

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

C++ API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor on file system level

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific 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

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

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

NoSQL Database Market (Latest Report) 2023 To Garner ...
17 January 2023, Digital Journal

NoSQL Database Market Growth and Key Dynamics 2023 ...
18 January 2023, Digital Journal

Why We Built Cloud Native Object Storage for PostgreSQL with ...
29 November 2022, The New Stack

TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
22 August 2019, Packt Hub

NoSQL Basics: Features, Types, and Examples
18 October 2022, Spiceworks News and Insights

provided by Google News

Share this page