DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

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

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational 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	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

www.memcached.org

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

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2015

2003

2012

1987

Current release

3.3 July 2023

1.6.25, March 2024

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

free development license

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

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

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

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

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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.

User concepts

Access control

rights management via user accounts

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

Redis extends the lead in the DB-Engines key-value store ranking
3 February 2014, Matthias Gelbmann

New DB-Engines Ranking shows the popularity of database management systems
3 October 2012, Matthias Gelbmann, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Redis Labs Boldly Joins AWS in Dropping Prices From 10 to 40 Percent
27 April 2024, Yahoo Singapore News

Why DDoS Threat Actors Are Shifting Their Tactics
15 March 2024, Infosecurity Magazine

Memcached DDoS: The biggest, baddest denial of service attacker yet
1 March 2018, ZDNet

Why Redis beats Memcached for caching
14 September 2017, InfoWorld

What are memcached servers, and why are they being used to launch record-setting DDoS attacks?
6 March 2018, GeekWire

provided by Google News

Azure Cosmos DB Data Migration tool imports from Azure Table storage | Azure updates
5 May 2015, azure.microsoft.com

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

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

Testing Precompiled Azure Functions Locally with Storage Emulator
8 March 2018, Visual Studio Magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page