DBMS > Axibase vs. Badger vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Lovefield vs. Netezza

System Properties Comparison Axibase vs. Badger vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. Lovefield vs. Netezza

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on HBase with integrated rule engine and visualization

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

Primary database model

Time Series DBMS

Key-value store

Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#292	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	3.26
Rank	#92	Overall
	#13	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Website

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

cloud.google.com/bigtable

google.github.io/lovefield

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

Technical documentation

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

Developer

Axibase Corporation

DGraph Labs

Google

IBM

Initial release

2013

2017

2015

2014

2000

Current release

15585

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Community Edition (single node) is free, Enterprise Edition (distributed) is paid

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Java

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux

included in appliance

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

short, integer, long, float, double, decimal, string

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

JavaScript

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

none

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

none

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

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic single-row operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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

Recent citations in the news

The Ultimate ATV Test: Suzuki's King Quad 750 AXI Rugged Package vs. Alaska's Hunting Season
20 April 2021, Outdoor Life

provided by Google News

Google's AI-First Strategy Brings Vector Support To Cloud Databases
1 March 2024, Forbes

Google Introduces Autoscaling for Cloud Bigtable for Optimizing Costs
31 January 2022, InfoQ.com

Google scales up Cloud Bigtable NoSQL database
27 January 2022, TechTarget

Review: Google Bigtable scales with ease
7 September 2016, InfoWorld

Google Cloud makes it cheaper to run smaller workloads on Bigtable
7 April 2020, TechCrunch

provided by Google News

IBM announces availability of the high-performance, cloud-native Netezza Performance Server as a Service on AWS
11 July 2023, ibm.com

AWS and IBM Netezza come out in support of Iceberg in table format face-off
1 August 2023, The Register

Migrating your Netezza data warehouse to Amazon Redshift | Amazon Web Services
27 May 2020, AWS Blog

IBM Brings Back a Netezza, Attacks Yellowbrick
29 June 2020, Datanami

Netezza Performance Server
12 August 2020, ibm.com

provided by Google News

Share this page