DBMS > Badger vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Badger vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB

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.

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

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	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Website

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

origodb.com

Technical documentation

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

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

origodb.com/docs

Developer

DGraph Labs

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2017

2010

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

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

Erlang

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

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

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

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

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

atomic operations within a document possible

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role based authorization

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.