DBMS > etcd vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Teradata

System Properties Comparison etcd vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Teradata

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A distributed reliable key-value store

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

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

A hybrid cloud data analytics software platform (Teradata Vantage)

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	4.36
Rank	#72	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	0.17
Rank	#337	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	27.71
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	44.87
Rank	#22	Overall
	#15	Relational DBMS

Website

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

cloud.google.com/datastore

machbase.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.teradata.com

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

machbase.com/dbms

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

docs.teradata.com

Developer

Google

Machbase

Microsoft

Teradata

Initial release

2008

2013

2014

1984

Current release

3.4, August 2019

V8.0, August 2023

Teradata Vantage 1.0 MU2, January 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free test version available

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

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

hosted
Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

Join-index to prejoin tables, aggregate index, sparse index, hash index

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (GQL)

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL 2016 + extensions

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

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

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

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

.NET Client API
HTTP REST
JDBC
JMS Adapter
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

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

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

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

C
C++
Cobol
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
Perl
PL/1
Python
R
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

using Google App Engine

JavaScript

yes

UDFs, stored procedures, table functions in parallel

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Hashing

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

Multi-source replication using Paxos

selectable replication factor

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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.

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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.

yes

volatile and lookup table

yes

User concepts

Access control

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

simple password-based access control

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.