DBMS > Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Tibero vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SQLite vs. Tibero vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	114.32
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	1.78
Rank	#140	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

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

www.sqlite.org

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

technet.tmaxsoft.com/upload/download/online/tibero/pver-20150504-000002/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2014

2012

2000

2003

2017

Current release

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

C and Assembler

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

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

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)
Tibero CLI

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

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

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

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Java
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

JavaScript

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

yes

Triggers

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes

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

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

yes

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

optimistic locking

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard (SQL 92, SQL 99)

Role-based access control

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.