DBMS > BaseX vs. etcd vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison BaseX vs. etcd vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. TimesTen

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

A distributed reliable key-value store

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Native XML DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.90
Rank	#136	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

Score	7.64
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	829.80
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	1.35
Rank	#165	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Website

basex.org

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

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

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

docs.basex.org

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

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

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

BaseX GmbH

Microsoft

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2007

1989

1998

Current release

10.7, August 2023

3.4, August 2019

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

XQuery supports types

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

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

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

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

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

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

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

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

via events

yes, watching key changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

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

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

multiple readers, single writer

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

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.