DBMS > Firebase Realtime Database vs. Hazelcast vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Firebase Realtime Database vs. Hazelcast vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. RavenDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Cloud-hosted realtime document store. iOS, Android, and JavaScript clients share one Realtime Database instance and automatically receive updates with the newest data.

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	14.29
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

hazelcast.com

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

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

firebase.google.com/docs/database

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

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

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Hazelcast

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2012

2008

1989

2010

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
Windows

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

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

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

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

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

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

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

yes

Triggers

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

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

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

if the client is offline
Immediate Consistency

if the client is online

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

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

yes, based on authentication and database rules

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.