DBMS > EJDB vs. LeanXcale vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. LeanXcale vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. TimescaleDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

A highly scalable full ACID SQL database with fast NoSQL data ingestion and GIS capabilities

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

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Document store

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	0.36
Rank	#280	Overall
	#40	Key-value stores
	#129	Relational DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	4.46
Rank	#71	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

www.leanxcale.com

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

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Softmotions

LeanXcale

Microsoft

Timescale

Initial release

2012

2015

2012

2017

Current release

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

commercial

Open Source

Apache 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.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

server-less

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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

through Apache Derby

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

JDBC
Kafka Connector
ODBC
proprietary key/value interface
Spark Connector

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

C
Java
Scala

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

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

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

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

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

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

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

Quick Guide to Azure Storage Pricing
16 May 2023, DevOps.com

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB Is a Vector Database Now, Too
25 September 2023, Datanami

Timescale Acquires PopSQL to Bring a Modern, Collaborative SQL GUI to PostgreSQL Developers
4 April 2024, PR Newswire

Power IoT and time-series workloads with TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL
18 March 2019, azure.microsoft.com

Timescale Valuation Rockets to Over $1B with $110M Round, Marking the Explosive Rise of Time-Series Data
22 February 2022, Business Wire

TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
22 August 2019, Packt Hub

provided by Google News

Share this page