DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. etcd vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	7.64
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	4.92
Rank	#73	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.75
Rank	#88	Overall
	#47	Relational DBMS

Website

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

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.progress.com/openedge

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Progress Software Corporation

Initial release

2016

2012

1984

Current release

1703

3.4, August 2019

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

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

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

optimistic locking

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 based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users and groups

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

ETCD directives don't go well with RBI's stellar reputation
14 April 2024, Business Standard

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

RBI holds firm on rupee derivatives stance, defers norm implementation to May 3
4 April 2024, The Hindu

RBI defers exchange traded currency derivatives norms
5 April 2024, The Indian Express

provided by Google News

Azure Cosmos DB Data Migration tool imports from Azure Table storage | Azure updates
5 May 2015, azure.microsoft.com

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

Testing Precompiled Azure Functions Locally with Storage Emulator
8 March 2018, Visual Studio Magazine

provided by Google News

OpenEdge Application Development | Progress OpenEdge
14 September 2014, Progress Software

PoC Exploit Released for OpenEdge Authentication Gateway & AdminServer Vulnerability
11 March 2024, GBHackers

provided by Google News

Share this page