DBMS > Badger vs. BigchainDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Microsoft SQL Server

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. BigchainDB vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Microsoft SQL Server

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

BigchainDB is scalable blockchain database offering decentralization, immutability and native assets

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	0.79
Rank	#212	Overall
	#36	Document stores

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.bigchaindb.com

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

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

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

Technical documentation

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

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

docs.heavy.ai

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

Developer

DGraph Labs

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Microsoft

Initial release

2017

2016

2012

1989

Current release

5.10, January 2022

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL v3

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

restricted free version is available

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

Python

C++ and CUDA

C++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

hosted

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Supported programming languages

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

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

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Round robin

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

yes

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

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

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

yes,with MongoDB ord RethinkDB

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.