DBMS > BigObject vs. Blueflood vs. Drizzle vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Blueflood vs. Drizzle vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake

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

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on Cassandra

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

High performance knowledge graph and semantic reasoning engine

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.19
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#346	Overall
	#33	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#300	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

blueflood.io

www.oxfordsemantic.tech

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

github.com/rax-maas/blueflood/wiki

docs.oxfordsemantic.tech

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Rackspace

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Oxford Semantic Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2013

2008

2017

2014

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

6.0, Septermber 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GNU GPL

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

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

predefined scheme

yes

RDF schemas

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-like DML and DDL statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

JDBC

RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C
Java

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

based on Cassandra

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

replication via a shared file system

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

none

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

Immediate Consistency in stand-alone mode, Eventual Consistency in replicated setups

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Roles, resources, and access types

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.