DBMS > Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store
Wide column store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	3.26
Rank	#92	Overall
	#13	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigtable

www.memcached.org

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

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

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

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Google

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2015

2003

2010

2000

Current release

1.6.25, March 2024

V12

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

hosted

server-less

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

.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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

yes, with always 3 replicas available

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

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

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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.