DBMS > BigObject vs. Blueflood vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. Blueflood vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on Cassandra

Enhanced drop-in replacement for MySQL based on XtraDB or TokuDB storage engines with improved performance and additional diagnostic and management features.

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#353	Overall
	#34	Time Series DBMS

Score	2.03
Rank	#122	Overall
	#57	Relational DBMS

Score	8.42
Rank	#47	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

blueflood.io

www.percona.com/software/mysql-database/percona-server

prometheus.io

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

github.com/rax-maas/blueflood/wiki

www.percona.com/downloads/Percona-Server-LATEST

prometheus.io/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

Rackspace

Percona

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2013

2008

2015

2014

Current release

8.0.36-28, 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPL version 2

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

C and 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

Linux

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

predefined scheme

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

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

Import of XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

HTTP REST

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

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
XtraDB Cluster

yes

by Federation

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

none

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.