DBMS > DataFS vs. PlanetScale vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison DataFS vs. PlanetScale vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

All data is stored inside objects which are linked by so-called link attributes. Objects consist of classes which can be extended and de-extended at runtime. Graphs can be defined with a struct.

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

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

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.02
Rank	#369	Overall
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	1.09
Rank	#178	Overall
	#82	Relational DBMS

Score	133.72
Rank	#7	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#345	Overall
	#34	Graph DBMS

Website

newdatabase.com

planetscale.com

www.snowflake.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

dev.mobiland.com/Overview.xsp

planetscale.com/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Mobiland AG

PlanetScale

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2018

2020

2014

2009

Current release

1.1.263, October 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

hosted

Data scheme

Classes, Structs, and Lists are written in proprietary DataTypeDefinitionLanguage (.dtdl) and Objects consisting of those are written in proprietary DataAccessDefinitionLanguage (.dadl)

yes

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

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

.NET Client API
Proprietary client DLL
WinRT client

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
VB.Net

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Groovy
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

user defined functions

Triggers

no, except callback-events from server when changes happened

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Proprietary Sharding system

Sharding

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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 across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at shard level

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Windows-Profile

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.