DBMS > BigObject vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Sequoiadb vs. Transwarp StellarDB

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Sequoiadb vs. Transwarp StellarDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

A distributed graph DBMS built for enterprise-level graph applications

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#39	Graph DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.sequoiadb.com

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/stellardb

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Microsoft

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Transwarp

Initial release

2015

2014

2013

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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

C++

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

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

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

proprietary protocol using JSON

OpenCypher

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

JavaScript

Triggers

JavaScript

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

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

Transaction concepts

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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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 can be defined down to the item level

simple password-based access control

yes

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.