DBMS > Firebase Realtime Database vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite vs. Tigris

System Properties Comparison Firebase Realtime Database vs. Sequoiadb vs. SQLite vs. Tigris

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.

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A horizontally scalable, ACID transactional, document database available both as a fully managed cloud service and for deployment on self-managed infrastructure

Primary database model

Document store

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store
Search engine
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	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.02
Rank	#369	Overall
	#51	Document stores
	#55	Key-value stores
	#24	Search engines
	#38	Time Series DBMS

Website

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

www.sequoiadb.com

www.sqlite.org

www.tigrisdata.com

Technical documentation

firebase.google.com/docs/database

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.tigrisdata.com/docs

Developer

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Tigris Data, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2013

2000

2022

Current release

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

Open Source

Public Domain

Open Source

Apache Version 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++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

server-less

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

proprietary protocol using JSON

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

CLI Client
gRPC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

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

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

JavaScript

Triggers

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

yes

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

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

Document is locked during a transaction

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using FoundationDB

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

simple password-based access control

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.