DBMS > BigchainDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison BigchainDB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB vs. PlanetScale

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

BigchainDB is scalable blockchain database offering decentralization, immutability and native assets

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Primary database model

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.85
Rank	#208	Overall
	#35	Document stores

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

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Website

www.bigchaindb.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

origodb.com

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

origodb.com/docs

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

PlanetScale

Initial release

2016

2014

2012

2009

under the name LiveDB

2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

AGPL v3

commercial

Open Source

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

Python

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

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

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

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

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

JavaScript

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
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

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

optimistic locking

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes,with MongoDB ord RethinkDB

yes

Write ahead log

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

yes

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Role based authorization

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.