DBMS > Firebase Realtime Database vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison Firebase Realtime Database vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Warp 10

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.

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

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	14.29
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#349	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

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

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

www.sqlite.org

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

firebase.google.com/docs/database

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

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

SenX

Initial release

2012

2010

2012

2000

2015

Current release

V12

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

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

hosted

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

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

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

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

Transact SQL

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

yes

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

none

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

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

based on HBase

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.