DBMS > Hazelcast vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. SQLite vs. Tibero

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

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

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

Primary database model

Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational 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	6.87
Rank	#55	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	4.92
Rank	#73	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	4.57
Rank	#78	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Score	116.01
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.81
Rank	#143	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Website

hazelcast.com

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

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

www.sqlite.org

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

technet.tmaxsoft.com/upload/download/online/tibero/pver-20150504-000002/index.html

Developer

Hazelcast

Microsoft

SAP

formerly Sybase

Dwayne Richard Hipp

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2008

2012

1992

2000

2003

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

17, July 2015

3.45.3 (15 April 2024), April 2024

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Java

C and Assembler

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)
Tibero CLI

Supported programming languages

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

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

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Java
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

yes

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

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

none

Multi-source replication
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

Transaction concepts

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

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

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard (SQL 92, SQL 99)

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.