DBMS > Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Valentina Server

System Properties Comparison Memcached vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Valentina Server

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Object-relational database and reports server

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	25.40
Rank	#28	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	32.41
Rank	#25	Overall
	#3	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	0.22
Rank	#277	Overall
	#130	Relational DBMS

Website

www.memcached.org

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.valentina-db.net

Technical documentation

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

docs.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

valentina-db.com/docs/dokuwiki/v5/doku.php

Developer

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Paradigma Software

Initial release

2003

2014

1999

Current release

1.6.9, November 2020

5.7.5

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

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

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

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

ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

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

.Net
C
C#
C++
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby
Visual Basic
Visual Basic.NET

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

yes

Triggers

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

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

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.