DBMS > AlaSQL vs. Apache IoTDB vs. CrateDB vs. Google BigQuery

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. Apache IoTDB vs. CrateDB vs. Google BigQuery

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

JavaScript DBMS library

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

Distributed Database based on Lucene

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS
Search engine
Time Series DBMS
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.49
Rank	#259	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	1.19
Rank	#176	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.73
Rank	#229	Overall
	#37	Document stores
	#5	Spatial DBMS
	#16	Search engines
	#19	Time Series DBMS
	#8	Vector DBMS

Score	61.90
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Website

alasql.org

iotdb.apache.org

cratedb.com

cloud.google.com/bigquery

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

cratedb.com/docs

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

Apache Software Foundation

Crate

Google

Initial release

2014

2018

2013

2010

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

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.

CrateDB Cloud: a distributed SQL database that spreads data and processing across an elastic cluster of shared nothing nodes. CrateDB Cloud enables data insights at scale on Microsoft Azure, AWS and Google Cloud Platform.

Implementation language

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

All Operating Systems, including Kubernetes with CrateDB Kubernetes Operator support

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

Close to SQL99, but no user access control, stored procedures and host language bindings.

SQL-like query language

yes, but no triggers and constraints, and PostgreSQL compatibility

yes

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

JDBC
Native API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
PostgreSQL wire protocol
Prometheus Remote Read/Write
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

.NET
Erlang
Go

community maintained client
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

community maintained client
Perl

community maintained client
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

community maintained client
Scala

community maintained client

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions (Javascript)

user defined functions

in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

Configurable replication on table/partition-level

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

Eventual Consistency
Read-after-write consistency on record level

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

only for local storage and DOM-storage

unique row identifiers can be used for implementing an optimistic concurrency control strategy

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by using IndexedDB, SQL.JS or proprietary FileStorage

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

yes

rights management via user accounts

Access privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

The enterprise database for time series, documents, and vectors. Distributed - Native...
» more

Competitive advantages

Response time in milliseconds: e ven for complex ad-hoc queries. Massive scaling...
» more

Typical application scenarios

IoT: accelerate your IIoT projects with CrateDB, delivering real-time analytics...
» more

Key customers

Across all continents, CrateDB is used by companies of all sizes to meet the most...
» more

Market metrics

The CrateDB open source project was started in 2013 Honorable Mention in 2021 Gartner®...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

See CrateDB pricing >
» more

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.