DBMS > BigObject vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Ingres vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Ingres vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SiriDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

Well established RDBMS

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Open Source Time Series DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	3.15
Rank	#95	Overall
	#14	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	3.80
Rank	#82	Overall
	#44	Relational DBMS

Score	27.71
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.07
Rank	#378	Overall
	#42	Time Series DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

cloud.google.com/bigtable

www.actian.com/databases/ingres

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

siridb.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

docs.actian.com/ingres

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

docs.siridb.com

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Google

Actian Corporation

Microsoft

Cesbit

Initial release

2015

1974

originally developed at University Berkely in early 1970s

2014

2017

Current release

11.2, May 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

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

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

hosted

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

Numeric data

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.

but tools for importing/exporting data from/to XML-files available

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
proprietary protocol (OpenAPI)

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

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

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

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Ingres Star to access multiple databases simultaneously

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

Ingres Replicator

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes

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

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

MVCC

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

simple rights management via user accounts

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.