DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. TimesTen

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

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.60
Rank	#246	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Score	1.36
Rank	#161	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Website

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

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

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Percona

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2016

2012

2015

1998

Current release

1703

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPL Version 2

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
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

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

proprietary protocol using JSON

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

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

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

via In-Memory Engine

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Access rights for users and roles

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

Recent citations in the news

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

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

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

Inside Azure File Storage
7 October 2015, azure.microsoft.com

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

provided by Google News

MongoDB Performance Tuning
23 May 2024, Database Trends and Applications

How to Plan Your MongoDB Upgrade
29 January 2024, The New Stack

Why Isn't the World Upgrading Its Databases?
25 March 2024, The New Stack

FerretDB goes GA: Gives you MongoDB, without the MongoDB...
15 May 2023, The Stack

The essential guide to MongoDB security
2 February 2017, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Share this page