DBMS > Drizzle vs. Hypertable vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison Drizzle vs. Hypertable vs. Microsoft SQL Server vs. Warp 10

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.

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

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

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Microsofts flagship relational DBMS

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	824.29
Rank	#3	Overall
	#3	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#349	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

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

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Drizzle project, originally started by Brian Aker

Hypertable Inc.

Microsoft

SenX

Initial release

2008

2009

1989

2015

Current release

7.2.4, September 2012

0.9.8.11, March 2016

SQL Server 2022, November 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU GPL

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

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++

Java

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Linux
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC

C++ API
Thrift

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

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

C
C++
Java
PHP

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

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

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

hooks for callbacks inside the server can be used.

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

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

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor on file system level

yes, but depending on the SQL-Server Edition

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

based on HBase

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

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

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.