DBMS > Infobright vs. Microsoft Azure AI Search vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. MySQL

System Properties Comparison Infobright vs. Microsoft Azure AI Search vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. MySQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Search-as-a-service for web and mobile app development

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Widely used open source RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Search engine

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Secondary database models

Vector DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.88
Rank	#198	Overall
	#92	Relational DBMS

Score	5.75
Rank	#58	Overall
	#7	Search engines

Score	72.95
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Website

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/search

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

www.mysql.com

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/search

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

dev.mysql.com/doc

Developer

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2005

2015

2010

1995

Current release

V12

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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

C++

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux
Windows

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

Secondary indexes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

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

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes, with always 3 replicas available

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

yes

using Azure authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.