DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Infobright vs. PlanetScale vs. SAP HANA

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Infobright vs. PlanetScale vs. SAP HANA

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

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.02
Rank	#192	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

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

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

planetscale.com

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

Technical documentation

planetscale.com/docs

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

PlanetScale

SAP

Initial release

2016

2005

2020

2010

Current release

1703

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

also available as a cloud based service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

Implementation language

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Appliance or cloud-service

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

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

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

ACID at shard level

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.