DBMS > Amazon DocumentDB vs. etcd vs. RavenDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Amazon DocumentDB vs. etcd vs. RavenDB 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

A distributed reliable key-value store

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.91
Rank	#132	Overall
	#24	Document stores

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

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/documentdb

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

ravendb.net

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

aws.amazon.com/documentdb/resources

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

ravendb.net/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Hibernating Rhinos

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2019

2010

2014

Current release

3.4, August 2019

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license 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

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

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

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

proprietary protocol using JSON (MongoDB compatible)

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python

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

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

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

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

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

Multi-source replication

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

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

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, Cluster-wide transaction available

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.

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.