DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. Lovefield vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. Lovefield vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines
Name	Atos Standard Common Repository  Xexclude from comparison	Hypertable  Xexclude from comparison	Lovefield  Xexclude from comparison	Yaacomo  Xexclude from comparison
	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.		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	An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop	Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript	OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing
Primary database model	Document store Key-value store	Wide column store	Relational DBMS	Relational DBMS
DB-Engines Ranking measures the popularity of database management systems Trend Chart			Score 0.33 Rank #286   Overall #131   Relational DBMS
Website	atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository		google.github.io/­lovefield	yaacomo.com
Technical documentation			github.com/­google/­lovefield/­blob/­master/­docs/­spec_index.md
Developer	Atos Convergence Creators	Hypertable Inc.	Google	Q2WEB GmbH
Initial release	2016	2009	2014	2009
Current release	1703	0.9.8.11, March 2016	2.1.12, February 2017
License Commercial or Open Source	commercial	Open Source GNU version 3. Commercial license available	Open Source Apache 2.0	commercial
Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service	no	no	no	no
DBaaS offerings (sponsored links) Database as a Service Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.
Implementation language	Java	C++	JavaScript
Server operating systems	Linux	Linux OS X Windows an inofficial Windows port is available	server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js) tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari	Android Linux Windows
Data scheme	Schema and schema-less with LDAP views	schema-free	yes	yes
Typing predefined data types such as float or date	optional	no	yes	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		no	no
Secondary indexes	yes	restricted only exact value or prefix value scans	yes	yes
SQL Support of SQL	no	no	SQL-like query language via JavaScript builder pattern	yes
APIs and other access methods	LDAP	C++ API Thrift		JDBC ODBC
Supported programming languages	All languages with LDAP bindings	C++ Java Perl PHP Python Ruby	JavaScript
Server-side scripts Stored procedures	no	no	no
Triggers	yes	no	Using read-only observers	yes
Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes	Sharding cell division	Sharding	none	horizontal partitioning
Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes	yes	selectable replication factor on file system level	none	Source-replica replication
MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods		yes	no	no
Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system	Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration	Immediate Consistency		Immediate Consistency
Foreign keys Referential integrity	no	no	yes	yes
Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data	Atomic execution of specific operations	no	ACID	ACID
Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data	yes	yes	yes	yes
Durability Support for making data persistent	yes	yes	yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database	yes
In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.	yes		yes using MemoryDB	yes
User concepts Access control	LDAP bind authentication	no	no	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
	Atos Standard Common Repository	Hypertable	Lovefield	Yaacomo
Recent citations in the news		TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out 22 August 2019, Packt Hub SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud 31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor Decorate your Windows XP with Hyperdesk 30 July 2008, CNET The Collective: Customize Your Computer & Your Phone With Star Trek 18 March 2009, TrekMovie 5 Free NoSQL Database Certification Courses in 2024 – AIM 31 January 2024, Analytics India Magazine provided by Google News

Share this page