DBMS > AlaSQL vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge vs. Snowflake vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison AlaSQL vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenEdge vs. Snowflake vs. Warp 10

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

JavaScript DBMS library

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Application development environment with integrated database management system

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

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.46
Rank	#260	Overall
	#40	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	3.51
Rank	#86	Overall
	#46	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#349	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

alasql.org

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.progress.com/openedge

www.snowflake.com

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

github.com/AlaSQL/alasql

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Andrey Gershun & Mathias R. Wulff

Microsoft

Progress Software Corporation

Snowflake Computing Inc.

SenX

Initial release

2014

2012

1984

2014

2015

Current release

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT-License

commercial

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

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

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

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

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

schema-free

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

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

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

APIs and other access methods

JavaScript API

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

JavaScript

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

yes

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica replication

yes

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Immediate Consistency

based on HBase

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

optimistic locking

ACID

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

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users and groups

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

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.