DBMS > FatDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OpenQM vs. ToroDB

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. OpenQM vs. ToroDB

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.

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	807.76
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.28
Rank	#291	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Website

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

github.com/torodb/server

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

Developer

FatCloud

Microsoft

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

8Kdata

Initial release

2012

1989

1993

2016

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

AGPL-V3

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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

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

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

yes

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

yes

Transaction concepts

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

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Access rights for users and 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.