– Widely used and well-established. – Excellent performance, especially for read-heavy applications. – Robust community support.
– Challenges with complex transactions. – Limited support for JSON data.
– Advanced features like JSONB, HSTORE, and full-text search. – ACID-compliant with strong support for complex queries. – Extensive documentation.
– Slightly slower write performance compared to MySQL. – Can be resource-intensive.
– Serverless, self-contained, and zero-configuration. – Great for mobile and small-scale applications. – Easy to set up and manage.
– Not suitable for high-concurrency scenarios. – Limited support for complex transactions.
– Schema flexibility and scalability. – Ideal for handling large volumes of unstructured data. – Horizontal scaling capabilities.
– Lack of ACID compliance. – Not the best choice for highly transactional applications.
– Integration with Microsoft technologies. – Excellent support for complex queries and transactions. – Robust security features.
– Licensing costs can be high. – Limited cross-platform compatibility.
– Lightning-fast read and write operations. – Ideal for caching and real-time analytics. – Support for various data structures.
– Limited persistence options. – Not suitable for data sets larger than available RAM.
– A drop-in replacement for MySQL. – Enhanced performance and scalability. – Active open-source community.
– Limited third-party tool support compared to MySQL. – Smaller ecosystem.
– Powerful full-text search capabilities. – Real-time data analytics. – Distributed architecture for scalability.
– Complex setup and configuration. – Resource-intensive.
– Unmatched in terms of scalability and performance. – Advanced security features. – Comprehensive support for complex data types.
– Expensive licensing. – Steeper learning curve.