If we consider context of computing, what is the opposite of distributed? Is it single or combined ? What is the opposite of "distributed system"?

  • 13
    This question would be improved with more context. Can you provide an example of a sentence where you would like to use this word?
    – Kit Z. Fox
    Aug 8, 2011 at 12:45
  • 2
    -1 for lack of context. For all I know, OP could be asking about disaster relief agencies' stockpiles which have not yet been distributed to the people in need of them. Aug 8, 2011 at 16:45
  • 3
    The opposite of git is subversion Aug 8, 2011 at 19:28
  • After 24 hours with no clarification from OP about the context, I'm voting to close as "not constructive". Aug 9, 2011 at 21:15
  • At the systems level, the opposite of 'distributed' is 'integrated'. The recent edit of the question title from "opposite" to "antonym" muddies the water a bit, there being several types of antonyms. At the systems level, candidates for "antonym" include 'integrated', 'pooled' and 'converged'.
    – JEL
    May 28, 2016 at 3:29

6 Answers 6


In the context of databases and software applications in general, the antonym of distributed is centralized.

  • I agree - this is a better (or at least, more generically applicable) answer than mine
    – SteveM
    Aug 8, 2011 at 14:10
  • 2
    I have to disagree here. In CS terms, Distributed is generally used to mean across > 1 machines or files. Centralized is used to mean within the same organization, building or locality (Decentralized being opposite). As you can see here, a system (software, DB, hardware, etc) can be distributed and centralized at the same time. Source: I'm a CS Graduate that studied distributed systems for my Masters Thesis. Sep 8, 2015 at 14:41
  • 1
    @JoshuaKissoon I disagree. In terms of graph algorithms, a centralized algorithm can be seen as one entity taking decisions having global knowledge of the given graph, whereas a distributed algorithm can be seen as all vertices of the graph taking individual decisions based on their limited local knowledge, accomplishing (or not) a global goal. The two seem to be opposites.
    – J. Schmidt
    Aug 18, 2020 at 15:25
  • I'm late to the party, but I also disagree. In my mind "centralization" is precisely a strategy for distributing work. A central "server" distributes work by dispatching it to "clients", who are all aware of the server's role as a central point of coordination. This definition confuses the role of the database as a server with the distinction between a monolithic server and a distributed server. Note: "monolithic" is the best word I've got, but it isn't great... Feb 2, 2021 at 18:05

Probably depends on the precise situation, but for written technical use I would go with "co-located". "Distributed" implies different things in different locations, where "co-located" implies different things in the same location. Both of your suggestions actually suggest only a single thing (in one way or another)


Or perhaps an appropriate word is "localized."


Concentrated is an antonym for 'distributed' from its connotation of 'spread out'.

  • Location: Distributed ↔️ Co-located
  • Control: Decentralized ↔️ Central

I also wrote a longer explanation


Some distributed computing frameworks [1] also use the term single node setup. This would match a context where distributed mainly refers to the fact that computation runs across multiple compute nodes. In this context, something like local computation might be appropriate as well.

[1] https://community.hortonworks.com/questions/203614/-what-is-cluster-single-node-cluster-and-node.html

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.