DBMS > Badger vs. GigaSpaces vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft SQL Server

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. GigaSpaces vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft SQL Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Search engine

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	0.97
Rank	#192	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.gigaspaces.com

google.github.io/lovefield

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

Technical documentation

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

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

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

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

Developer

DGraph Labs

Gigaspaces Technologies

Google

Microsoft

Initial release

2017

2000

2014

1989

Current release

15.5, September 2020

2.1.12, February 2017

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

restricted free version is available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java, C++, .Net

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

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.

XML can be used for describing objects metadata

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

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

Supported programming languages

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

JavaScript

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

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

Triggers

yes, event driven architecture

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

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

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

none

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

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.