LiteDB vs Microsoft SQL Server

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

LiteDB

36
182
+ 1
24
Microsoft SQL Server

19.4K
15K
+ 1
540
Add tool

LiteDB vs Microsoft SQL Server: What are the differences?

  1. LiteDB: LiteDB is a lightweight, embedded NoSQL database written in .NET that stores data in a single file. It is designed to be simple and easy to use, providing document-oriented database functionality with support for BSON documents. The focus of LiteDB is on simplicity, portability, and low memory footprint.

  2. Microsoft SQL Server: Microsoft SQL Server is a full-featured relational database management system (RDBMS) that offers a wide range of features and capabilities for enterprise-level data storage and management. It is designed to handle large amounts of structured and relational data efficiently, with support for complex queries, transactions, security, and scalability.

  3. Data Model: LiteDB stores data in a document-oriented model using BSON (Binary JSON) documents. It provides a flexible schema-less approach, allowing documents with different structures to be stored in the same collection. On the other hand, Microsoft SQL Server follows a traditional relational data model, where data is organized into tables with predefined schemas and relationships between tables can be established.

  4. Query Language: LiteDB provides a simple and lightweight query language for querying documents using LINQ syntax. It supports basic querying capabilities like filtering, sorting, and projection. In contrast, Microsoft SQL Server uses Structured Query Language (SQL) for querying relational data. SQL offers a wide range of powerful features, including complex joins, aggregations, and subqueries, making it a more versatile and expressive language for data manipulation and analysis.

  5. Transaction Support: LiteDB supports a form of multi-document transactions using a transaction log. It allows multiple operations to be grouped together into a single atomic transaction, ensuring data consistency and integrity. Microsoft SQL Server, on the other hand, provides full transaction support, including ACID (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) properties. It allows multiple operations to be executed within a transaction, ensuring data integrity and providing mechanisms for concurrent access control.

  6. Scalability and Performance: LiteDB is optimized for embedded scenarios and lightweight applications, making it suitable for small to medium-scale deployments with low to moderate data volumes. It provides good performance for single-threaded operations and has a low memory footprint. Microsoft SQL Server, on the other hand, is designed for large-scale enterprise deployments with high data volumes and high concurrency requirements. It provides advanced optimization techniques, indexing mechanisms, and parallel execution capabilities to handle complex workloads efficiently.

In Summary, LiteDB is a lightweight, embedded NoSQL database with a document-oriented data model and a simple query language, while Microsoft SQL Server is a feature-rich RDBMS with a relational data model, powerful SQL querying capabilities, full transaction support, and scalability for large-scale enterprise deployments.

Advice on LiteDB and Microsoft SQL Server

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
on
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
Christopher Wray
Web Developer at Soltech LLC · | 3 upvotes · 429.2K views
Recommends
on
DirectusDirectus
at

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
Julien DeFrance
Principal Software Engineer at Tophatter · | 3 upvotes · 428.8K views
Recommends
on
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
Recommends
on
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 · 428.8K views
Recommends
on
PostgreSQLPostgreSQL

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

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of LiteDB
Pros of Microsoft SQL Server
  • 6
    No Sql
  • 5
    Portable
  • 4
    Easy to use
  • 3
    Document oriented storage
  • 2
    Bring up or extend a database very quickly
  • 2
    Open Source
  • 2
    Capable of storing images or documents
  • 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
    Full Index Support
  • 17
    Always on
  • 10
    Enterprise manager is fantastic
  • 9
    In-Memory OLTP Engine
  • 2
    Easy to setup and configure
  • 2
    Security is forefront
  • 1
    Faster Than Oracle
  • 1
    Decent management tools
  • 1
    Great documentation
  • 1
    Docker Delivery
  • 1
    Columnstore indexes

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of LiteDB
Cons of Microsoft SQL Server
  • 2
    Online documentation needs improvement
  • 2
    Needs more real world examples
  • 4
    Expensive Licensing
  • 2
    Microsoft

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

- No public GitHub repository available -

What is LiteDB?

Embedded NoSQL database for .NET. An open source MongoDB-like database with zero configuration - mobile ready

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 LiteDB?
What companies use Microsoft SQL Server?
    No companies found
    See which teams inside your own company are using LiteDB or Microsoft SQL Server.
    Sign up for StackShare EnterpriseLearn More

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

    What tools integrate with LiteDB?
    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 LiteDB and Microsoft SQL Server?
    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.
    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.
    MySQL
    The MySQL software delivers a very fast, multi-threaded, multi-user, and robust SQL (Structured Query Language) database server. MySQL Server is intended for mission-critical, heavy-load production systems as well as for embedding into mass-deployed software.
    Realm
    The Realm Mobile Platform is a next-generation data layer for applications. Realm is reactive, concurrent, and lightweight, allowing you to work with live, native objects.
    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.
    See all alternatives