DBMS > IBM Cloudant vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB

System Properties Comparison IBM Cloudant vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

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

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Primary database model

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

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

Website

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

google.github.io/lovefield

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

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

Technical documentation

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

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

origodb.com/docs

Developer

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Google

Microsoft

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

Initial release

2010

2014

2012

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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

Erlang

JavaScript

Server operating systems

hosted

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

JavaScript

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

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

yes

Triggers

yes

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

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

yes

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

none

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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

Access rights for users can be defined per database

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

Cloudant Best (and Worst) Practices — Part 1
18 March 2019, ibm.com

Intro to Enterprise Cloud Storage: How to Set Up a Cloudant Database
1 December 2014, Linux.com

IBM Expands Cloud Database Services with Kubernetes
26 September 2019, EnterpriseAI

IBM Code Engine and IBM Cloudant: Serverless Data and Infrastructure
16 August 2021, ibm.com

IBM to Purchase Cloudant Database as a service (DBaaS) Provider
22 March 2014, App Developer Magazine

provided by Google News

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

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

Inside Azure File Storage
7 October 2015, azure.microsoft.com

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

provided by Google News

Higher Education PS rules out ghost students before PAC
29 November 2018, diggers.news

provided by Google News

Share this page