DBMS > Drizzle vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Netezza

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Netezza

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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.

Description

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	821.56
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	8.59
Rank	#45	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

learn.microsoft.com/en-US/sql/sql-server

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Microsoft

IBM

Initial release

2008

2010

1989

2000

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

restricted free version is available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

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

SQLServer Flex @ STACKIT offers a managed version of SQL Server with adjustable CPU, RAM, storage amount and speed, in enterprise grade to perfectly match all application requirements. All services are 100% GDPR-compliant.

Implementation language

C++

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

.NET

Linux
Windows

Linux

included in appliance

Data scheme

yes

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

JDBC

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB
Tabular Data Stream (TDS)

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C#
C++
Delphi
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Visual Basic

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Transact SQL, .NET languages, R, Python and (with SQL Server 2019) Java

yes

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

tables can be distributed across several files (horizontal partitioning); sharding through federation

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.