IndexedDB vs Microsoft SQL Server

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

IndexedDB

28
69
+ 1
0
Microsoft SQL Server

15.1K
11.1K
+ 1
539
Add tool

Microsoft SQL Server vs IndexedDB: What are the differences?

Microsoft SQL Server: A relational database management system developed by Microsoft. Microsoft® SQL Server is a database management and analysis system for e-commerce, line-of-business, and data warehousing solutions; IndexedDB: A low-level API for client-side storage of significant amounts of structured data. This API uses indexes to enable high-performance searches of this data. While Web Storage is useful for storing smaller amounts of data, it is less useful for storing larger amounts of structured data.

Microsoft SQL Server and IndexedDB can be categorized as "Databases" tools.

Advice on IndexedDB and Microsoft SQL Server
Needs advice
on
PostgreSQLPostgreSQLMongoDBMongoDB
and
IndexedDBIndexedDB

I'm currently developing an app that ranks trending stuff ( such as games, memes or movies, etc. ) or events in a particular country or region. Here are the specs: My app does not require registration and requires cookies and localStorage to track users. Users can add new entries to each trending category provided that their country of origin is recorded in cookies. If each category contains more than 100 items then the oldest items get deleted. The question is: what kind of database should I use for managing this app? Thanks in advance

See more
Replies (1)
Recommends
MongoDBMongoDB

I think your best and cheapest choice is going to be MongoDB, Although Postgres is probably going to be the more scaleable approach, you likely have a good idea of how you want to present your data, and the app seems small enough that you shouldn't need to worry about scaling issues. It also sounds like your app can grow in a linear capacity based on the number of users, and the amount of data, which is the perfect use-case for noSQL databases (linear, predictable scaling).

Correct me if I have any of these assumptions wrong. 1. You're looking to have a relatively high-read with a lower write volume 2. Your app is essentially a list of objects that can belong to a category 3. users can create objects in this list.

I think Mongo is going to be what you're looking for on the following basis: 1. you absolutely need a database that is shared by all users of your app, therefor IndexedDB is out of the question. 2. You have semi-structured data 3. you probably want the cheapest solution.

I think Postgres is wrong for the following reasons: 1. your app is pretty simple in concept, SQL databases will add unnecessary complexity to your system, either through ORMs or SQL queries. (use an ORM if you go with SQL) 2. Hosting SQL databases for production is not cheap! the cheapest solution I know of for Postgres is ElephantSQL. It provides 20MB for free with 5 concurrent connections, you should be okay to manage these limitations if you decide to go Postgres in the end. Whereas mongoDB Atlas has some great free-tier options.

Although your data might be easier to model in Postgres, you can certainly model your data as a single list of items that have a category attached.

I don't want to officially recommend another tool, but you should really checkout prisma, firebase, amplify, or Azure App Services for this app! Just go completely backend-less [Firebase] https://firebase.google.com/ [Amplify] https://aws.amazon.com/amplify/ [Prisma] https://www.prisma.io/ [Azure App Services] https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/app-service/?v=18.51

See more

I am a Microsoft SQL Server programmer who is a bit out of practice. I have been asked to assist on a new project. The overall purpose is to organize a large number of recordings so that they can be searched. I have an enormous music library but my songs are several hours long. I need to include things like time, date and location of the recording. I don't have a problem with the general database design. I have two primary questions:

  1. I need to use either MySQL or PostgreSQL on a Linux based OS. Which would be better for this application?
  2. I have not dealt with a sound based data type before. How do I store that and put it in a table? Thank you.
See more
Replies (6)

Hi Erin,

Honestly both databases will do the job just fine. I personally prefer Postgres.

Much more important is how you store the audio. While you could technically use a blob type column, it's really not ideal to be storing audio files which are "several hours long" in a database row. Instead consider storing the audio files in an object store (hosted options include backblaze b2 or aws s3) and persisting the key (which references that object) in your database column.

See more
Aaron Westley
Recommends
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

Hi Erin, Chances are you would want to store the files in a blob type. Both MySQL and Postgres support this. Can you explain a little more about your need to store the files in the database? I may be more effective to store the files on a file system or something like S3. To answer your qustion based on what you are descibing I would slighly lean towards PostgreSQL since it tends to be a little better on the data warehousing side.

See more
Julien DeFrance
Principal Software Engineer at Tophatter · | 3 upvotes · 167.8K views
Recommends
Amazon AuroraAmazon Aurora

Hi Erin! First of all, you'd probably want to go with a managed service. Don't spin up your own MySQL installation on your own Linux box. If you are on AWS, thet have different offerings for database services. Standard RDS vs. Aurora. Aurora would be my preferred choice given the benefits it offers, storage optimizations it comes with... etc. Such managed services easily allow you to apply new security patches and upgrades, set up backups, replication... etc. Doing this on your own would either be risky, inefficient, or you might just give up. As far as which database to chose, you'll have the choice between Postgresql, MySQL, Maria DB, SQL Server... etc. I personally would recommend MySQL (latest version available), as the official tooling for it (MySQL Workbench) is great, stable, and moreover free. Other database services exist, I'd recommend you also explore Dynamo DB.

Regardless, you'd certainly only keep high-level records, meta data in Database, and the actual files, most-likely in S3, so that you can keep all options open in terms of what you'll do with them.

See more
Christopher Wray
Web Developer at Soltech LLC · | 3 upvotes · 168.2K views

Hey Erin! I would recommend checking out Directus before you start work on building your own app for them. I just stumbled upon it, and so far extremely happy with the functionalities. If your client is just looking for a simple web app for their own data, then Directus may be a great option. It offers "database mirroring", so that you can connect it to any database and set up functionality around it!

See more
Recommends
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

Hi Erin,

  • Coming from "Big" DB engines, such as Oracle or MSSQL, go for PostgreSQL. You'll get all the features you need with PostgreSQL.
  • Your case seems to point to a "NoSQL" or Document Database use case. Since you get covered on this with PostgreSQL which achieves excellent performances on JSON based objects, this is a second reason to choose PostgreSQL. MongoDB might be an excellent option as well if you need "sharding" and excellent map-reduce mechanisms for very massive data sets. You really should investigate the NoSQL option for your use case.
  • Starting with AWS Aurora is an excellent advise. since "vendor lock-in" is limited, but I did not check for JSON based object / NoSQL features.
  • If you stick to Linux server, the PostgreSQL or MySQL provided with your distribution are straightforward to install (i.e. apt install postgresql). For PostgreSQL, make sure you're comfortable with the pg_hba.conf, especially for IP restrictions & accesses.

Regards,

See more
Klaus Nji
Staff Software Engineer at SailPoint Technologies · | 1 upvotes · 167.8K views
Recommends
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

I recommend Postgres as well. Superior performance overall and a more robust architecture.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using Private StackShare. Sign up for Private StackShare.
Learn More
Pros of IndexedDB
Pros of Microsoft SQL Server
    Be the first to leave a pro
    • 139
      Reliable and easy to use
    • 102
      High performance
    • 95
      Great with .net
    • 65
      Works well with .net
    • 56
      Easy to maintain
    • 21
      Azure support
    • 17
      Always on
    • 17
      Full Index Support
    • 10
      Enterprise manager is fantastic
    • 9
      In-Memory OLTP Engine
    • 2
      Security is forefront
    • 1
      Columnstore indexes
    • 1
      Great documentation
    • 1
      Faster Than Oracle
    • 1
      Decent management tools
    • 1
      Easy to setup and configure
    • 1
      Docker Delivery

    Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

    Cons of IndexedDB
    Cons of Microsoft SQL Server
      Be the first to leave a con
      • 4
        Expensive Licensing
      • 2
        Microsoft

      Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

      What is IndexedDB?

      This API uses indexes to enable high-performance searches of this data. While Web Storage is useful for storing smaller amounts of data, it is less useful for storing larger amounts of structured data.

      What is Microsoft SQL Server?

      Microsoft® SQL Server is a database management and analysis system for e-commerce, line-of-business, and data warehousing solutions.

      Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

      What companies use IndexedDB?
      What companies use Microsoft SQL Server?
      See which teams inside your own company are using IndexedDB or Microsoft SQL Server.
      Sign up for Private StackShareLearn More

      Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

      What tools integrate with IndexedDB?
      What tools integrate with Microsoft SQL Server?

      Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

      What are some alternatives to IndexedDB and Microsoft SQL Server?
      SQLite
      SQLite is an embedded SQL database engine. Unlike most other SQL databases, SQLite does not have a separate server process. SQLite reads and writes directly to ordinary disk files. A complete SQL database with multiple tables, indices, triggers, and views, is contained in a single disk file.
      Pouchdb
      PouchDB enables applications to store data locally while offline, then synchronize it with CouchDB and compatible servers when the application is back online, keeping the user's data in sync no matter where they next login.
      MongoDB
      MongoDB stores data in JSON-like documents that can vary in structure, offering a dynamic, flexible schema. MongoDB was also designed for high availability and scalability, with built-in replication and auto-sharding.
      Redis
      Redis is an open source (BSD licensed), in-memory data structure store, used as a database, cache, and message broker. Redis provides data structures such as strings, hashes, lists, sets, sorted sets with range queries, bitmaps, hyperloglogs, geospatial indexes, and streams.
      CouchDB
      Apache CouchDB is a database that uses JSON for documents, JavaScript for MapReduce indexes, and regular HTTP for its API. CouchDB is a database that completely embraces the web. Store your data with JSON documents. Access your documents and query your indexes with your web browser, via HTTP. Index, combine, and transform your documents with JavaScript.
      See all alternatives