DBMS > FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiteWhere vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. LevelDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiteWhere vs. Yaacomo

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.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

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

M2M integration platform for persisting/querying time series data

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	2.25
Rank	#115	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.06
Rank	#383	Overall
	#43	Time Series DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

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

github.com/sitewhere/sitewhere

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

sitewhere1.sitewhere.io/index.html

Developer

FatCloud

Google

Microsoft

SiteWhere

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2011

2012

2010

2009

Current release

1.23, February 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

commercial

Open Source

Common Public Attribution License Version 1.0

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

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

predefined scheme

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

based on HBase

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

none

yes

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

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

Malicious npm 'colors' typosquats pack Discord malware
3 May 2022, Sonatype Blog

Pliops unveils XDP-Rocks for RocksDB – Blocks and Files
19 October 2022, Blocks and Files

Microsoft Teams stores auth tokens as cleartext in Windows, Linux, Macs
14 September 2022, BleepingComputer

XanMod, Liquorix Kernels Offer Some Advantages On AMD Ryzen 5 Notebook
26 July 2021, Phoronix

Threat Thursday: BlackGuard Infostealer Rises from Russian Underground Markets
21 April 2022, BlackBerry Blog

provided by Google News

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

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

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

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

SiteWhere: An open platform for connected devices
11 July 2017, Open Source For You

11 Best Open source IoT Platforms To Develop Smart Projects
9 March 2023, H2S Media

provided by Google News

Share this page