DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. Brytlyt vs. Hazelcast vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. Brytlyt vs. Hazelcast vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Fast, scalable, highly available, and fully managed MongoDB-compatible database service

Scalable GPU-accelerated RDBMS for very fast analytic and streaming workloads, leveraging PostgreSQL

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#132	Overall
	#24	Document stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#288	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

brytlyt.io

hazelcast.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

docs.brytlyt.io

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Brytlyt

Hazelcast

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2019

2016

2008

2014

Current release

5.0, August 2023

5.3.6, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

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

C, C++ and CUDA

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

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

specific XML-type available, but no XML query functionality.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Events

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-availability zones for high availability, asynchronous replication for up to 15 read replicas

Source-replica replication

yes

Replicated Map

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not used, however similar functionality with DBRef possible

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-document operations

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Access rights for users and roles

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

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.