DBMS > AgensGraph vs. BigObject vs. etcd vs. EXASOL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison AgensGraph vs. BigObject vs. etcd vs. EXASOL vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Multi-model database supporting relational and graph data models and built upon PostgreSQL

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

A distributed reliable key-value store

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.20
Rank	#321	Overall
	#27	Graph DBMS
	#143	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	1.99
Rank	#124	Overall
	#58	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

bitnine.net/agensgraph

bigobject.io

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.exasol.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

bitnine.net/documentation

docs.bigobject.io

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

www.exasol.com/resources

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Bitnine Global Inc.

BigObject, Inc.

Exasol

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2016

2015

2000

2014

Current release

2.1, December 2018

3.4, August 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

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

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

hosted

Data scheme

depending on used data model

yes

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

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

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

Cypher Query Language
JDBC

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
Java
JavaScript
Python

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

Java
Lua
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

no, but can be realized using table inheritance

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.