DBMS > Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. ObjectBox vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. ObjectBox vs. OrigoDB vs. SQLite

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Lightweight, fast on-device database for IoT, Mobile and Embedded devices, persisting and synchronising objects and vectors

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Object oriented DBMS
Vector DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	72.95
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	1.08
Rank	#179	Overall
	#6	Object oriented DBMS
	#9	Vector DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#54	Document stores
	#21	Object oriented DBMS

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

github.com/objectbox
objectbox.io

origodb.com

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

docs.objectbox.io

origodb.com/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Microsoft

ObjectBox Limited

Robert Friberg et al

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2010

2017

2009

under the name LiveDB

2000

Current release

V12

4.0 (May 2024)

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Bindings are released under Apache 2.0

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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++

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Android
Any POSIX system
Docker
iOS
Linux
macOS
QNX
Windows

Linux
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, plus "flex" map-like types

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary native API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

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

C
C++
Dart (Flutter)
Go
Java
Kotlin
Python
Swift

.Net

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

Data sync between devices allowing occasional connected databases to work completely offline

Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

Role based authorization

More information provided by the system vendor

News

MongoDB Realm & Device Sync alternatives – ObjectBox
17 September 2024

Local AI – what it is and why we need it
11 September 2024

First on-device Vector Database (aka Semantic Index) for iOS
24 July 2024

Retrieval Augmented Generation (RAG) with vector databases: Expanding AI Capabilities
18 June 2024

The on-device Vector Database for Android and Java
29 May 2024

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.