DBMS > Apache Drill vs. JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Snowflake vs. Tibero

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Snowflake vs. Tibero

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Elastic, large scale data warehouse service leveraging the broad eco-system of SQL Server

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

A secure RDBMS, designed for easy portability from Oracle

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.95
Rank	#127	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	20.56
Rank	#31	Overall
	#19	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	1.78
Rank	#140	Overall
	#64	Relational DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

www.jaguardb.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/synapse-analytics

www.snowflake.com

us.tmaxsoft.com/products/tibero

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.microsoft.com/azure/synapse-analytics

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

technet.tmaxsoft.com/upload/download/online/tibero/pver-20150504-000002/index.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

DataJaguar, Inc.

Microsoft

Snowflake Computing Inc.

TmaxSoft

Initial release

2012

2015

2016

2014

2003

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

3.3 July 2023

6, April 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

C++

C and Assembler

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)
Tibero CLI

Supported programming languages

C++

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C#
Java
PHP

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Java
Objective-C
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

Transact SQL

user defined functions

Persistent Stored Procedure (PSM)

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Sharding, horizontal partitioning

yes

horizontal partitioning

by range, hash, list or composite

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/synapse-analytics/sql-data-warehouse/sql-data-warehouse-table-constraints

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

Depending on the underlying data source

planned for next version

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

rights management via user accounts

yes

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard (SQL 92, SQL 99)

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.