DBMS > EsgynDB vs. FatDB vs. Snowflake vs. Spark SQL

System Properties Comparison EsgynDB vs. FatDB vs. Snowflake vs. Spark SQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Description

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

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

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

Spark SQL is a component on top of 'Spark Core' for structured data processing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	18.96
Rank	#33	Overall
	#20	Relational DBMS

Website

www.esgyn.cn

www.snowflake.com

spark.apache.org/sql

Technical documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

spark.apache.org/docs/latest/sql-programming-guide.html

Developer

Esgyn

FatCloud

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Apache Software Foundation

Initial release

2015

2012

2014

Current release

3.5.0 ( 2.13), September 2023

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

C++, Java

Scala

Server operating systems

Linux

Windows

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

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

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

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Java
Python
R
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Java Stored Procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via applications

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

yes, utilizing Spark Core

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

selectable replication factor

yes

none

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

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

In-memory capabilities

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.