DBMS > Coveo vs. etcd vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. SAP HANA vs. Yanza

System Properties Comparison Coveo vs. etcd vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. SAP HANA vs. Yanza

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yanza seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Description

AI-powered hosted search, recommendation and personalization platform providing tools for both low-code and full-code development

A distributed reliable key-value store

Cloud-hosted realtime document store. iOS, Android, and JavaScript clients share one Realtime Database instance and automatically receive updates with the newest data.

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

Time Series DBMS for IoT Applications

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	2.11
Rank	#118	Overall
	#11	Search engines

Score	7.03
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	13.64
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Website

www.coveo.com

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

yanza.com

Technical documentation

docs.coveo.com

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

firebase.google.com/docs/database

help.sap.com/hana

Developer

Coveo

Google

acquired by Google 2014

SAP

Yanza

Initial release

2012

2010

2015

Current release

3.4, August 2019

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free version available

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

yes

also available as a cloud based service

but mainly used as a service provided by Yanza

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

hosted

Appliance or cloud-service

Windows

Data scheme

hybrid - fields need to be configured prior to indexing, but relationships can be exploited at query time without pre-configuration

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

any language that supports HTTP calls

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

limited functionality with using 'rules'

SQLScript, R

Triggers

yes

yes, watching key changes

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

yes

Timer and event based

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

if the client is offline
Immediate Consistency

if the client is online

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

granular access controls, API key management, content filters

yes, based on authentication and database rules

yes

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.