DBMS > Lovefield vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. searchxml vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison Lovefield vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. searchxml vs. Stardog

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

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

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Wide column store

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	0.12
Rank	#339	Overall
	#30	Time Series DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

google.github.io/lovefield

machbase.com

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

www.searchxml.net/category/products

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

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

machbase.com/dbms

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Google

Machbase

Microsoft

informationpartners gmbh

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2014

2013

2012

2015

2010

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

V8.0, August 2023

1.0

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free test version available

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

JavaScript

C++

Java

Server operating systems

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like query language

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

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

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

on the application server

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

yes

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

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

multiple readers, single writer

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

yes

volatile and lookup table

yes

User concepts

Access control

simple password-based access control

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

Access rights for users and 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.

Related products and services

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

More resources

Recent citations in the news

Working with Azure to Use and Manage Data Lakes
7 March 2024, Simplilearn

Azure Cosmos DB Data Migration tool imports from Azure Table storage | Azure updates
5 May 2015, Microsoft

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

provided by Google News

Share this page