DBMS > CockroachDB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. JaguarDB vs. mSQL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison CockroachDB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. JaguarDB vs. mSQL vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

CockroachDB is a distributed database architected for modern cloud applications. It is wire compatible with PostgreSQL and backed by a Key-Value Store, which is either RocksDB or a purpose-built derivative, called Pebble.

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	6.15
Rank	#55	Overall
	#33	Relational DBMS

Score	4.47
Rank	#76	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.cockroachlabs.com

cloud.google.com/datastore

www.jaguardb.com

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.cockroachlabs.com/docs

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Cockroach Labs

Google

DataJaguar, Inc.

Hughes Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2008

2015

1994

2014

Current release

23.1.1, May 2023

3.3 July 2023

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache 2.0, commercial license available

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

dynamic schema

schema-free

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, details here

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

yes, wire compatible with PostgreSQL

SQL-like query language (GQL)

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Rust

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

using Google App Engine

user defined functions

Triggers

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning (by key range)

all tables are translated to an ordered KV store and then broken down into 64MB ranges, which are then used as replicas in RAFT

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication using RAFT

Multi-source replication using Paxos

Multi-source replication

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Eventual Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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.

User concepts

Access control

Role-based access control

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

rights management via user accounts

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.