DBMS > AlaSQL vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Tkrzw

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Tkrzw

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

JavaScript DBMS library

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

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

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Key-value store

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

Score	0.51
Rank	#256	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#118	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.07
Rank	#372	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Website

alasql.org

www.jaguardb.com

google.github.io/lovefield

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

dbmx.net/tkrzw

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

DataJaguar, Inc.

Google

Microsoft

Mikio Hirabayashi

Initial release

2014

2015

2014

2012

2020

Current release

3.3 July 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

JavaScript

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Close to SQL99, but no user access control, stored procedures and host language bindings.

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

JavaScript

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

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

none

yes

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

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

only for local storage and DOM-storage

ACID

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using IndexedDB, SQL.JS or proprietary FileStorage

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

using specific database classes

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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

HarperDB - How and Why We Built It From The Ground Up on NodeJS
28 February 2021, hackernoon.com

Create a Marvel Database with SQL and Javascript, the easy way
2 July 2019, Towards Data Science

Multi faceted data exploration in the browser using Leaflet and amCharts
3 May 2020, Towards Data Science

provided by Google News

Kagiso interactive shares: all eyes on android at google I/O
11 May 2015, WhaTech

provided by Google 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

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

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

provided by Google News

Share this page