DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. FatDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. FatDB vs. Hyprcubd vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Fast, scalable, highly available, and fully managed MongoDB-compatible database service

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Primary database model

Document store

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#132	Overall
	#24	Document stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

hyprcubd.com (offline)

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

Developer

FatCloud

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Microsoft

Initial release

2019

2012

2014

License

Commercial or Open Source

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

Server operating systems

hosted

Windows

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

yes

JSON types

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

gRPC (https)

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

via applications

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones for high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas

selectable replication factor

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not used, however similar functionality with DBRef possible

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-document operations

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

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.

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Can implement custom security layer via applications

token access

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.