DBMS > Badger vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. PlanetScale vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. PlanetScale 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 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

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

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

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

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

Score	3.55
Rank	#80	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1.09
Rank	#178	Overall
	#82	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

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

planetscale.com

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

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

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

DGraph Labs

FatCloud

Microsoft

PlanetScale

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2017

2012

2020

2009

License

Commercial or Open Source

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

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Windows

hosted

Docker
Linux
macOS

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

yes

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

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

ACID at shard level

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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

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

PlanetScale ends free tier bid, sheds staff in profitability bid
11 March 2024, The Register

PlanetScale Insights Anomalies introduces smart query monitoring
29 November 2023, SDTimes.com

PlanetScale forks MySQL to add vector support
3 October 2023, TechCrunch

Top Database as a Service (DBaaS) Startups
28 August 2024, Tracxn

PlanetScale review: Horizontally scalable MySQL in the cloud
1 September 2021, InfoWorld

provided by Google News

Share this page