DBMS > Coveo vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB vs. Solr

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB vs. Solr

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

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A widely used distributed, scalable search engine based on Apache Lucene

Primary database model

Search engine

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Search engine

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.28
Rank	#114	Overall
	#11	Search engines

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	42.91
Rank	#24	Overall
	#3	Search engines

Website

www.coveo.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

origodb.com

solr.apache.org

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

origodb.com/docs

solr.apache.org/resources.html

Developer

Coveo

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Apache Software Foundation

Initial release

2012

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

2006

Current release

9.6.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

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

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

runs as a servlet in servlet container (e.g. Tomcat, Jetty is included)

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

Dynamic Fields enables on-the-fly addition of new fields

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

supports customizable data types and automatic typing

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

All search fields are automatically indexed

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

Solr Parallel SQL Interface

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

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

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Java API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

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

.Net

.Net
Erlang
Java
JavaScript
any language that supports sockets and either XML or JSON
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

Java plugins

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Domain Events

yes

User configurable commands triggered on index changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

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

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

spark-solr: github.com/lucidworks/spark-solr and streaming expressions to reduce

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

yes

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role based authorization

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.