DBMS > Coveo vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. Machbase Neo vs. SAP SQL Anywhere

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. etcd vs. FatDB vs. Machbase Neo vs. SAP SQL Anywhere

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

Primary database model

Search engine

Key-value store

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#337	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	3.95
Rank	#80	Overall
	#42	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

machbase.com

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

machbase.com/dbms

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

Developer

Coveo

FatCloud

Machbase

SAP

formerly Sybase

Initial release

2012

2013

1992

Current release

3.4, August 2019

V8.0, August 2023

17, July 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free test version available

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

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
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

schema-free

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

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

volatile and lookup table

yes

User concepts

Access control

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Can implement custom security layer via applications

simple password-based access control

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Monitor Amazon EKS Control Plane metrics using AWS Open Source monitoring services | Amazon Web Services
12 October 2023, AWS Blog

Apache APISIX Without etcd?
27 July 2023, hackernoon.com

RBI reiterates need for underlying forex exposure for rupee derivatives transactions | Stock Market News
5 April 2024, Mint

Killing a market, softly: How an RBI communique could end India's thriving ETCD market
7 April 2024, The Economic Times

ETCD directives don't go well with RBI's stellar reputation
14 April 2024, Business Standard

provided by Google News

SAP vulnerabilities Let Attacker Inject OS Commands—Patch Now!
11 July 2023, CybersecurityNews

SAP Products & Services Data Portfolio
2 July 2021, Datamation

Securing SAP with AWS Network Firewall: Part 2 – Managed Rules | Amazon Web Services
17 July 2023, AWS Blog

MindsDB is now the leading and fastest growing applied ML platform in the world India - English
3 November 2022, PR Newswire

SAP launches HANA cloud platform, partners with Siemens, Intel
6 May 2015, Channel Daily News

provided by Google News

Share this page