DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. Badger vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. Badger vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Yaacomo

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.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

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

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

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.31
Rank	#159	Overall
	#14	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#328	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores

Score	3.55
Rank	#80	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Website

iotdb.apache.org

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

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

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

DGraph Labs

FatCloud

Microsoft

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2018

2017

2012

2009

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache 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

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Windows

hosted

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

SQL-like query language

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

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

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

none

selectable replication factor

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

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

none

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

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

yes

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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

AMD Zen 5 Not Affected By Inception/SRSO, mitigations=off Yields No Benefit On Ryzen 9000 Series
6 September 2024, Phoronix

TsFile: A Standard Format for IoT Time Series Data
27 February 2024, The New Stack

AMD EPYC 8534P / EPYC 8534PN Benchmarks - Siena Delivers Incredible Value & Energy Efficiency For Linux Servers Review
29 November 2023, Phoronix

Apache Promotes IoT Database Project
25 September 2020, Datanami

IoTDB Provides Data Management for Industrial Edge IT
15 October 2020, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Dgraph raises $11.5 million for scalable graph database solutions
31 July 2019, VentureBeat

provided by Google News

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
10 July 2024, InfoWorld

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
23 July 2024, Simplilearn

Azure Cosmos DB Data Migration tool imports from Azure Table storage
5 May 2015, Microsoft

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

Share this page