DBMS > Databend vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. OpenTSDB vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Databend vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB vs. OpenTSDB vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An open-source, elastic, and workload-aware cloud data warehouse designed to meet businesses' massive-scale analytics needs at low cost and with low complexity

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Scalable Time Series DBMS based on HBase

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.30
Rank	#287	Overall
	#130	Relational DBMS

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

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

Score	1.68
Rank	#146	Overall
	#12	Time Series DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/datafuselabs/databend
www.databend.com

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.jaguardb.com

opentsdb.net

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.databend.com

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

opentsdb.net/docs/build/html/index.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Databend Labs

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

DataJaguar, Inc.

currently maintained by Yahoo and other contributors

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2021

2010

2015

2011

2014

Current release

1.0.59, April 2023

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

LGPL

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

Rust

Erlang

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Java

Server operating systems

hosted
Linux
macOS

hosted

Linux

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numeric data for metrics, strings for tags

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

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

CLI Client
JDBC
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API
Telnet API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

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

Erlang
Go
Java
Python
R
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

based on HBase

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

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

based on HBase

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

yes

atomic operations within a document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles

Access rights for users can be defined per database

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.