DBMS > Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison Microsoft SQL Server vs. OrigoDB vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. Sequoiadb

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	4.25
Rank	#79	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Score	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Website

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

origodb.com

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

origodb.com/docs

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

Developer

Microsoft

Robert Friberg et al

SAP

formerly Sybase

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

1989

2009

under the name LiveDB

1992

2013

Current release

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

17, July 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

.Net

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

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

Role based authorization

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

simple password-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.