DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. Drizzle vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. Drizzle vs. Google Cloud Spanner vs. Hawkular Metrics vs. TimescaleDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A horizontally scalable, globally consistent, relational database service. It is the externalization of the core Google database that runs the biggest aspects of Google, like Ads and Google Play.

Hawkular metrics is the metric storage of the Red Hat sponsored Hawkular monitoring system. It is based on Cassandra.

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.18
Rank	#173	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.89
Rank	#103	Overall
	#52	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#379	Overall
	#40	Time Series DBMS

Score	4.64
Rank	#71	Overall
	#4	Time Series DBMS

Website

iotdb.apache.org

cloud.google.com/spanner

www.hawkular.org

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

cloud.google.com/spanner/docs

www.hawkular.org/hawkular-metrics/docs/user-guide

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Google

Community supported by Red Hat

Timescale

Initial release

2018

2008

2017

2014

2017

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

7.2.4, September 2012

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache 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

Java

C++

Java

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

Query statements complying to ANSI 2011

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

JDBC

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
JDBC

At present, JDBC supports read-only queries. No support for DDL or DML statements.
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

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

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

C
C++
Java
PHP

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Go
Java
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

via Hawkular Alerting

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

Sharding

based on Cassandra

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication with 3 replicas for regional instances.

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

by using interleaved tables, this features focuses more on performance improvements than on referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Strict serializable isolation

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

yes

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

MySQL won the April ranking; did its forks follow?
1 April 2015, Paul Andlinger

Has MySQL finally lost its mojo?
1 July 2013, Matthias Gelbmann

show all

Recent citations in the news

TsFile: A Standard Format for IoT Time Series Data
27 February 2024, The New Stack

AMD EPYC 8324P / 8324PN Siena 32-Core Siena Linux Server Performance Review
10 October 2023, Phoronix

Apache Promotes IoT Database Project
25 September 2020, Datanami

Benchmarking The Performance Impact To AMD Inception Mitigations
15 August 2023, Phoronix

IoTDB Provides Data Management for Industrial Edge IT
15 October 2020, The New Stack

provided by Google News

Google Improves Cloud Spanner: More Compute and Storage without Price Increase
14 October 2023, InfoQ.com

Google makes its Cloud Spanner database service faster and more cost-efficient
11 October 2023, SiliconANGLE News

Google turns up the heat on AWS, claims Cloud Spanner is half the cost of DynamoDB
11 October 2023, TechCrunch

Google Spanner: When Do You Need to Move to It?
11 September 2023, hackernoon.com

More AI Added to Google Cloud's Databases
28 February 2024, Datanami

provided by Google News

Waiting for Red Hat OpenShift 4.0? Too late, 4.1 has already arrived… • DEVCLASS
5 June 2019, DevClass

provided by Google News

TimescaleDB Is a Vector Database Now, Too
25 September 2023, Datanami

Timescale Acquires PopSQL to Bring a Modern, Collaborative SQL GUI to PostgreSQL Developers
4 April 2024, PR Newswire

Power IoT and time-series workloads with TimescaleDB for Azure Database for PostgreSQL
18 March 2019, Microsoft

Timescale Valuation Rockets to Over $1B with $110M Round, Marking the Explosive Rise of Time-Series Data
22 February 2022, Business Wire

SQL and TimescaleDB. This article takes a closer look into… | by Alibaba Cloud
31 July 2019, DataDrivenInvestor

provided by Google News

Share this page