DBMS > FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Riak TS vs. Transwarp StellarDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Riak TS vs. Transwarp StellarDB 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.

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

Riak TS is a distributed NoSQL database optimized for time series data and based on Riak KV

A distributed graph DBMS built for enterprise-level graph applications

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	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.28
Rank	#307	Overall
	#27	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#371	Overall
	#39	Graph DBMS

Website

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

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/stellardb

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

www.tiot.jp/riak-docs/riak/ts/latest

Developer

FatCloud

Microsoft

Open Source, formerly Basho Technologies

Transwarp

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2015

2009

Current release

3.0.0, September 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

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

Erlang

Server operating systems

Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X

Android
Linux
Windows

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

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes, limited

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

OpenCypher

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

unofficial client library
C#
C++

unofficial client library
Clojure

unofficial client library
Dart

unofficial client library
Erlang
Go

unofficial client library
Groovy

unofficial client library
Haskell

unofficial client library
Java
JavaScript

unofficial client library
Lisp

unofficial client library
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

unofficial client library
Smalltalk

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Erlang

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes

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

selectable replication factor

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

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

links between datasets can be stored

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

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

yes

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 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

New Basho Data Platform Provides Operational Simplicity for Enterprise Big Data Applications
7 June 2015, insideBIGDATA

Best open source databases for IoT applications
26 May 2017, Open Source For You

provided by Google News

Share this page