DBMS > Firebase Realtime Database vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Firebase Realtime Database vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite vs. TinkerGraph vs. Valentina Server

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Object-relational database and reports server

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	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Score	0.17
Rank	#327	Overall
	#145	Relational DBMS

Website

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

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

www.sqlite.org

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

firebase.google.com/docs/database

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

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2012

2010

2000

2009

1999

Current release

V12

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

hosted

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

yes

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

TinkerPop 3

ODBC

Supported programming languages

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

.Net
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

Groovy
Java

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

Transact SQL

yes

Triggers

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

none

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

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

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

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.