DBMS > LevelDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison LevelDB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Vitess

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

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

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Key-value store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.33
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	3.55
Rank	#80	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	807.76
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.86
Rank	#202	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/google/leveldb

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

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

vitess.io

Technical documentation

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Google

Microsoft

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2011

2012

1989

2013

Current release

1.23, February 2021

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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.

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

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

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

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, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

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

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

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

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

with automatic compression on writes

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 based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

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.