DBMS > Cubrid vs. GeoMesa vs. Lovefield vs. Riak KV vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Cubrid vs. GeoMesa vs. Lovefield vs. Riak KV vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

CUBRID is an open-source SQL-based relational database management system with object extensions for OLTP

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Distributed, fault tolerant key-value store

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

Primary database model

with links between data sets and object tags for the creation of secondary indexes

Relational DBMS

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

Score	1.20
Rank	#169	Overall
	#78	Relational DBMS

Score	0.78
Rank	#213	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	4.10
Rank	#82	Overall
	#9	Key-value stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

cubrid.com (korean)
cubrid.org (english)

www.geomesa.org

google.github.io/lovefield

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

cubrid.org/manuals

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.tiot.jp/riak-docs/riak/kv/latest

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

CUBRID Corporation, CUBRID Foundation

CCRi and others

Google

OpenSource, formerly Basho Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2008

2014

2009

2014

Current release

11.0, January 2021

5.0.0, May 2024

2.1.12, February 2017

3.2.0, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache version 2, commercial enterprise edition

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, C++, Java

Scala

JavaScript

Erlang

Server operating systems

Linux
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
OS X

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

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

restricted

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

JavaScript

unofficial client library
C#
C++

unofficial client library
Clojure

unofficial client library
Dart

unofficial client library
Erlang
Go

unofficial client library
Groovy

unofficial client library
Haskell

unofficial client library
Java
JavaScript

unofficial client library
Lisp

unofficial client library
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

unofficial client library
Smalltalk

unofficial client library

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

Erlang

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

depending on storage layer

none

Sharding

no "single point of failure"

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

depending on storage layer

none

selectable replication factor

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

depending on storage layer

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

links between data sets can be stored

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

depending on storage layer

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

yes, using Riak Security

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.