DBMS > Coveo vs. Derby vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. MonetDB

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. Derby vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. MonetDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

Full-featured RDBMS with a small footprint, either embedded into a Java application or used as a database server.

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A relational database management system that stores data in columns

Primary database model

Search engine

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.28
Rank	#114	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	4.71
Rank	#69	Overall
	#37	Relational DBMS

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

db.apache.org/derby

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

www.monetdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

db.apache.org/derby/manuals/index.html

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

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

Developer

Coveo

Apache Software Foundation

Microsoft

MonetDB BV

Initial release

2012

1997

1989

2004

Current release

10.17.1.0, November 2023

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 2.0

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.

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

SQL 2003 with some extensions

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC

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

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

Java

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

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

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

yes, in SQL, C, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

none

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

Sharding via remote tables

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

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.