DBMS > FatDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Machbase Neo vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Machbase Neo vs. PlanetScale

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

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

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store
Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	3.15
Rank	#95	Overall
	#14	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#337	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigtable

machbase.com

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

machbase.com/dbms

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

FatCloud

Google

Machbase

PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2015

2013

2020

Current release

V8.0, August 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

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

Windows

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

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

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

simple password-based access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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

Google's AI-First Strategy Brings Vector Support To Cloud Databases
1 March 2024, Forbes

Google Introduces Autoscaling for Cloud Bigtable for Optimizing Costs
31 January 2022, InfoQ.com

Google scales up Cloud Bigtable NoSQL database
27 January 2022, TechTarget

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

Google Cloud makes it cheaper to run smaller workloads on Bigtable
7 April 2020, TechCrunch

provided by Google News

PlanetScale ends free tier bid, sheds staff in profitability bid
11 March 2024, The Register

PlanetScale forks MySQL to add vector support
3 October 2023, TechCrunch

PlanetScale Named to Fortune 2023 Best Small Workplaces
31 August 2023, businesswire.com

PlanetScale review: Horizontally scalable MySQL in the cloud
1 September 2021, InfoWorld

How to Migrate to PlanetScale's Serverless Database
14 October 2021, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Share this page