DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. NSDb vs. OpenQM vs. SpaceTime

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hypertable vs. NSDb vs. OpenQM vs. SpaceTime

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

Scalable, High-performance Time Series DBMS designed for Real-time Analytics on top of Kubernetes

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

SpaceTime is a spatio-temporal DBMS with a focus on performance.

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Spatial DBMS

Website

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

nsdb.io

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

www.mireo.com/spacetime

Technical documentation

nsdb.io/Architecture

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Hypertable Inc.

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Mireo

Initial release

2016

2009

2017

1993

2020

Current release

1703

0.9.8.11, March 2016

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

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

C++

Java, Scala

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux
macOS

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes: int, bigint, decimal, string

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

all fields are automatically indexed

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

C++ API
Thrift

gRPC
HTTP REST
WebSocket

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Java
Scala

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

C#
C++
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

yes

Fixed-grid hypercubes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor on file system level

yes

Real-time block device replication (DRBD)

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

Eventual 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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Using Apache Lucene

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 can be defined down to the item level

yes

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

SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud
31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor

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

Decorate your Windows XP with Hyperdesk
30 July 2008, CNET

The Collective: Customize Your Computer & Your Phone With Star Trek
18 March 2009, TrekMovie

NoSQL Market: A well-defined technological growth map with an impact-analysis
19 June 2020, Inter Press Service

provided by Google News

Share this page