DBMS > Hazelcast vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OrigoDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

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

Website

hazelcast.com

google.github.io/lovefield

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

origodb.com

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

origodb.com/docs

Developer

Hazelcast

Google

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2008

2014

2012

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

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

JavaScript

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

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

JavaScript

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

Using read-only observers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

none

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

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

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

Write ahead log

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Role based authorization

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Hazelcast Weaves Wider Logic Threads Through The Data Fabric
7 March 2024, Forbes

Hazelcast 5.4 real time data processing platform boosts AI and consistency
17 April 2024, VentureBeat

Hazelcast Achieves Record Year with Leading Brands Choosing Its Platform for Application Modernization, AI Initiatives
22 February 2024, Datanami

Real-Time Data Platform Hazelcast Introduces New Chief Technology Officer Adrian Soars
7 November 2023, Finovate

Hazelcast Versus Redis: A Practical Comparison
4 January 2024, Database Trends and Applications

provided by Google News

Azure Cosmos DB Data Migration tool imports from Azure Table storage | Azure updates
5 May 2015, Microsoft

How to Use C# Azure.Data.Tables SDK with Azure Cosmos DB
9 July 2021, hackernoon.com

How to use Azure Table storage in .Net
14 January 2019, InfoWorld

How to write data to Azure Table Store with an Azure Function
14 April 2017, Experts Exchange

Testing Precompiled Azure Functions Locally with Storage Emulator
8 March 2018, Visual Studio Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page