DBMS > IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SQLite vs. TigerGraph vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SQLite vs. TigerGraph vs. TimescaleDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Score	4.64
Rank	#71	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.sqlite.org

www.tigergraph.com

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

docs.tigergraph.com

docs.timescale.com

Developer

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Timescale

Initial release

2010

2014

2000

2017

Current release

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

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

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

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

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++
Java

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

JavaScript

yes

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

yes

Transaction concepts

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

atomic operations within a document possible

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users can be defined per database

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Role-based access control

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.