DBMS > Faircom DB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TempoIQ vs. TerminusDB

System Properties Comparison Faircom DB vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TempoIQ vs. TerminusDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Scalable Graph Database platform making enterprise data available by exploiting inferred entities and relationships

Primary database model

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
RDF store

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

Score	0.20
Rank	#318	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores
	#141	Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.17
Rank	#325	Overall
	#29	Graph DBMS

Website

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

tempoiq.com (offline)

terminusdb.com

Technical documentation

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

terminusdb.github.io/terminusdb/#

Developer

FairCom Corporation

Microsoft

TempoIQ

DataChemist Ltd.

Initial release

1979

2014

2012

2018

Current release

V12, November 2020

11.0.0, January 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Restricted, free version available

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3

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

ANSI C, C++

Prolog, Rust

Server operating systems

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

yes

JSON types

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

yes, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

SQL-like query language

SQL-like query language (WOQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

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

HTTP API

OWL
RESTful HTTP API
WOQL (Web Object Query Language)

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

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

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

JavaScript
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Realtime Alerts

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Graph Partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Journaling Streams

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

yes

in-memory journaling

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard with additional protections for files

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

simple authentication-based access control

Role-based access control

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.