DBMS > Coveo vs. Dragonfly vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. Dragonfly vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Warp 10

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

A drop-in Redis replacement that scales vertically to support millions of operations per second and terabyte sized workloads, all on a single instance

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	0.49
Rank	#261	Overall
	#38	Key-value stores

Score	821.56
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#344	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly
www.dragonflydb.io

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

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

www.dragonflydb.io/docs

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

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Coveo

DragonflyDB team and community contributors

Microsoft

SenX

Initial release

2012

2023

1989

2015

Current release

1.0, March 2023

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSL 1.1

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

Apache 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

C++

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

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

scheme-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets, bit arrays

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

RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protocol

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

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

C
C#
C++
Clojure
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift
Tcl

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

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

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

yes

publish/subscribe channels provide some trigger functionality

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

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

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

based on HBase

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

Atomic execution of command blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, strict serializability by the server

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

Password-based authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.