DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

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

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

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

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.51
Rank	#86	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

google.github.io/lovefield

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

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

www.progress.com/openedge

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

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

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Google

Microsoft

Progress Software Corporation

Initial release

2015

2014

2012

1984

Current release

3.3 July 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

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

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language

yes

close to SQL 92

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

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

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

JavaScript

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

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

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

Using read-only observers

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

none

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

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

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

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

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users and groups

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.