DBMS > Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

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.

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigtable

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

origodb.com

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

origodb.com/docs

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

Developer

Google

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2015

2014

2009

under the name LiveDB

2013

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

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

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

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

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

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

.Net

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

JavaScript

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

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

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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)

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role based authorization

simple password-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.