DBMS > Drizzle vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL vs. VelocityDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

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

Widely used open source RDBMS

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	3.55
Rank	#80	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#40	Graph DBMS
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Website

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

www.mysql.com

velocitydb.com

Technical documentation

dev.mysql.com/doc

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2008

2012

1995

2011

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

9.0.0, July 2024

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are 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

C++

C and C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Any that supports .NET

Data scheme

yes

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

.Net

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

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

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

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

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

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Based on Windows Authentication

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.