DBMS > Hazelcast vs. Hyprcubd vs. Ingres vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. Hyprcubd vs. Ingres vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Sequoiadb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Serverless Time Series DBMS

Well established RDBMS

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Document store
Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

Score	3.80
Rank	#82	Overall
	#44	Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Website

hazelcast.com

hyprcubd.com (offline)

www.actian.com/databases/ingres

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.actian.com/ingres

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

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

Developer

Hazelcast

Hyprcubd, Inc.

Actian Corporation

Microsoft

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2008

1974

originally developed at University Berkely in early 1970s

2014

2013

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

11.2, May 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

hosted

AIX
HP Open VMS
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

yes

JSON types

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

but tools for importing/exporting data from/to XML-files available

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (https)

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
proprietary protocol (OpenAPI)

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

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

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

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

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Ingres Star to access multiple databases simultaneously

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Ingres Replicator

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 or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC

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

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

token access

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.