DBMS > Drizzle vs. FatDB vs. KeyDB vs. Snowflake vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. FatDB vs. KeyDB vs. Snowflake vs. TimescaleDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Drizzle has published its last release in September 2012. The open-source project is discontinued and Drizzle is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

MySQL fork with a pluggable micro-kernel and with an emphasis of performance over compatibility.

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

An ultra-fast, open source Key-value store fully compatible with Redis API, modules, and protocols

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

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.70
Rank	#229	Overall
	#32	Key-value stores

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	4.46
Rank	#71	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Website

github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB
keydb.dev

www.snowflake.com

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

docs.keydb.dev

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

FatCloud

EQ Alpha Technology Ltd.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Timescale

Initial release

2008

2012

2019

2014

2017

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

commercial

Open Source

BSD-3

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

C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

Linux

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

partial

Supported data types are strings, hashes, lists, sets and sorted sets, bit arrays, hyperloglogs and geospatial indexes

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data types

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

by using the Redis Search module

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Proprietary protocol

RESP - REdis Serialization Protoco

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C
C#
C++
Clojure
Crystal
D
Dart
Elixir
Erlang
Fancy
Go
Haskell
Haxe
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Pascal
Perl
PHP
Prolog
Pure Data
Python
R
Rebol
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Swift
Tcl
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

Lua

user defined functions

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

via applications

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Strong eventual consistency with CRDTs

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Optimistic locking, atomic execution of commands blocks and scripts

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Configurable mechanisms for persistency via snapshots and/or operations logs

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

Pluggable authentication mechanisms

e.g. LDAP, HTTP

Can implement custom security layer via applications

simple password-based access control and ACL

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.