DBMS > GeoMesa vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison GeoMesa vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Spatial DBMS

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.78
Rank	#213	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	4.47
Rank	#76	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.geomesa.org

cloud.google.com/datastore

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

CCRi and others

Google

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Microsoft

Initial release

2014

2008

2010

2014

2017

Current release

4.0.5, February 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache License 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

Scala

Erlang

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, details here

yes

JSON types

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (GQL)

SQL-like query language

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

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

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

using Google App Engine

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

yes

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

depending on storage layer

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

depending on storage layer

Multi-source replication using Paxos

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

depending on storage layer

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

atomic operations within a document possible

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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.

depending on storage layer

User concepts

Access control

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role-based access control

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.