DBMS > BigObject vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison BigObject vs. SAP SQL Anywhere vs. Snowflake vs. SWC-DB vs. Transbase

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

RDBMS database and synchronization technologies for server, desktop, remote office, and mobile environments

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	4.25
Rank	#79	Overall
	#43	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

bigobject.io

www.sap.com/products/technology-platform/sql-anywhere.html

www.snowflake.com

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

docs.bigobject.io

help.sap.com/docs/SAP_SQL_Anywhere

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

BigObject, Inc.

SAP

formerly Sybase

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Alex Kashirin

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2015

1992

2014

2020

1987

Current release

17, July 2015

0.5, April 2021

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3

commercial

free development license

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

C++

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)

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

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

schema-free

yes

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

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
HTTP API
JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Lua

yes, in C/C++, Java, .Net or Perl

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Source-replica replication

Database mirroring

yes

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

yes

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.