DBMS > Citus vs. Faircom DB vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Citus vs. Faircom DB vs. Prometheus vs. Snowflake vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Scalable hybrid operational and analytics RDBMS for big data use cases based on PostgreSQL

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

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

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

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

Score	2.21
Rank	#118	Overall
	#56	Relational DBMS

Score	0.20
Rank	#318	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores
	#141	Relational DBMS

Score	8.42
Rank	#47	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

www.citusdata.com

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

prometheus.io

www.snowflake.com

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.citusdata.com

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

prometheus.io/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

FairCom Corporation

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2010

1979

2015

2014

2017

Current release

8.1, December 2018

V12, November 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

AGPL, commercial license also available

commercial

Restricted, free version available

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

ANSI C, C++

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

Linux
Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

yes

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

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

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

specific XML type available, but no XML query functionality

Import of XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

standard, with numerous extensions

yes, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

yes

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

realized in proprietary language PL/pgSQL or with common languages like Perl, Python, Tcl etc.

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

other methods possible by using 3rd party extensions

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

yes

by Federation

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

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

Fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard with additional protections for files

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

Role-based access control

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.