DBMS > Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Oracle NoSQL vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

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

A multi-model, scalable, distributed NoSQL database, designed to provide highly reliable, flexible, and available data management across a configurable set of storage nodes

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Document store
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.05
Rank	#97	Overall
	#17	Document stores
	#16	Key-value stores
	#50	Relational DBMS

Website

google.github.io/lovefield

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

www.oracle.com/database/nosql/technologies/nosql

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

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

docs.oracle.com/en/database/other-databases/nosql-database/index.html

Developer

Google

Microsoft

Oracle

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2014

2012

2011

2009

Current release

2.1.12, February 2017

24.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Proprietary for Enterprise Edition (Oracle Database EE license has Oracle NoSQL database EE covered: details)

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

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

Linux
Solaris SPARC/x86

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Support Fixed schema and Schema-less deployment with the ability to interoperate between them.

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

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

C
C#
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

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.

Electable source-replica replication per shard. Support distributed global deployment with Multi-region table feature

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

configurable

ACID within a storage node (=shard)

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

off heap cache

yes

User concepts

Access control

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Access rights for users and roles

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

Recent citations in the news

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

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

Quick Guide to Azure Storage Pricing
16 May 2023, DevOps.com

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

provided by Google News

Oracle Beefs Up Its NoSQL Database Offering
31 May 2024, Data Center Knowledge

OpenWorld 2013: Oracle NoSQL Database On the Rise?
13 December 2023, Channel Futures

Blog Theme - Details
21 August 2023, blogs.oracle.com

We built a geo-distributed, serverless modern app using the Oracle NoSQL Database Cloud Service
18 November 2021, blogs.oracle.com

Oracle NoSQL database comes to the cloud
2 April 2020, TechTarget

provided by Google News

Share this page