DBMS > Apache Drill vs. JaguarDB vs. Netezza vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Apache Drill vs. JaguarDB vs. Netezza vs. Percona Server for MongoDB vs. Snowflake

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

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

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

Primary database model

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.28
Rank	#119	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#56	Relational DBMS

Score	0.09
Rank	#356	Overall
	#53	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	10.18
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	0.55
Rank	#253	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Score	123.20
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

drill.apache.org

www.jaguardb.com

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

drill.apache.org/docs

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

DataJaguar, Inc.

IBM

Percona

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2012

2015

2000

2015

2014

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

3.3 July 2023

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL Version 2

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++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

included in appliance

Linux

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

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

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

proprietary protocol using JSON

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++

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

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

yes

JavaScript

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

yes

via In-Memory Engine

User concepts

Access control

Depending on the underlying data source

rights management via user accounts

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

Access rights for users and roles

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.