DBMS > Apache IoTDB vs. HugeGraph vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Apache IoTDB vs. HugeGraph vs. mSQL vs. OrigoDB vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

A fast-speed and highly-scalable Graph DBMS

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

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

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.31
Rank	#164	Overall
	#14	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.17
Rank	#335	Overall
	#31	Graph DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#169	Overall
	#76	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

iotdb.apache.org

github.com/hugegraph
hugegraph.apache.org

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

origodb.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

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

hugegraph.apache.org/docs

origodb.com/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Apache Software Foundation

Baidu

Hughes Technologies

Robert Friberg et al

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

1994

2009

under the name LiveDB

2014

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

0.9

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

Open Source

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

Java

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

Linux
macOS
Unix

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

also supports composite index and range index

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Native API

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
TinkerPop Gremlin

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

Groovy
Java
Python

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

.Net

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

asynchronous Gremlin script jobs

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

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

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

yes

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

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

none

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

via hugegraph-spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

Eventual Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

edges in graph

depending on model

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

yes

Write ahead log

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

Users, roles and permissions

Role based authorization

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.