DBMS > FatDB vs. InfinityDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. InfinityDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database

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.

A Java embedded Key-Value Store which extends the Java Map interface

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.08
Rank	#365	Overall
	#55	Key-value stores

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	76.78
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Website

boilerbay.com

google.github.io/lovefield

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

Technical documentation

boilerbay.com/infinitydb/manual

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

Developer

FatCloud

Boiler Bay Inc.

Google

Microsoft

Initial release

2012

2002

2014

2010

Current release

4.0

2.1.12, February 2017

V12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Java

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

Windows

All OS with a Java VM

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

nested virtual Java Maps, multi-value, logical â€˜tuple spaceâ€™ runtime Schema upgrade

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

all Java primitives, Date, CLOB, BLOB, huge sparse arrays

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

manual creation possible, using inversions based on multi-value capability

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

Access via java.util.concurrent.ConcurrentNavigableMap Interface
Proprietary API to InfinityDB ItemSpace (boilerbay.com/docs/ItemSpaceDataStructures.htm)

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Java

JavaScript

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

via applications

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

none

yes, with always 3 replicas available

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

READ-COMMITTED or SERIALIZED

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

manual creation possible, using inversions based on multi-value capability

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Optimistic locking for transactions; no isolation for bulk loads

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

DB-Engines blog posts

PostgreSQL is the DBMS of the Year 2020
4 January 2021, Paul Andlinger, Matthias Gelbmann

Cloud-based DBMS's popularity grows at high rates
12 December 2019, Paul Andlinger

The popularity of cloud-based DBMSs has increased tenfold in four years
7 February 2017, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

Copilot in Azure SQL Database in Private Preview
27 March 2024, InfoQ.com

Microsoft unveils Copilot for Azure SQL Database
27 March 2024, InfoWorld

Azure SQL Database migration to OCI - resources estimation and migration approach
11 January 2024, blogs.oracle.com

Expand the limits of innovation with Azure data
21 March 2024, microsoft.com

Why migrate Windows Server and SQL Server to Azure: ROI, innovation, and free offers
25 April 2024, microsoft.com

provided by Google News

Share this page