DBMS > Faircom DB vs. JaguarDB vs. Snowflake vs. Titan

System Properties Comparison Faircom DB vs. JaguarDB vs. Snowflake vs. Titan

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Titan has been decommisioned after the takeover by Datastax. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking. A fork has been open-sourced as JanusGraph.

Description

Native high-speed multi-model DBMS for relational and key-value store data simultaneously accessible through SQL and NoSQL APIs.

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

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

Titan is a Graph DBMS optimized for distributed clusters.

Primary database model

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.20
Rank	#318	Overall
	#48	Key-value stores
	#141	Relational DBMS

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

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-db

www.jaguardb.com

www.snowflake.com

github.com/thinkaurelius/titan

Technical documentation

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-7446ae34-a1a7-c843-c894-d5322e395184.html

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

github.com/thinkaurelius/titan/wiki

Developer

FairCom Corporation

DataJaguar, Inc.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Aurelius, owned by DataStax

Initial release

1979

2015

2014

2012

Current release

V12, November 2020

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Restricted, free version available

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache license, version 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

ANSI C, C++

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Java

Server operating systems

AIX
FreeBSD
HP-UX
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
QNX
SCO
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

easily portable to other OSs

Linux

hosted

Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Data scheme

schema free, schema optional, schema required, partial schema,

yes

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

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes, ANSI SQL Types, JSON, typed binary structures

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, ANSI SQL with proprietary extensions

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
RESTful MQTT/JSON API
RPC

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Java API
TinkerPop Blueprints
TinkerPop Frames
TinkerPop Gremlin
TinkerPop Rexster

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js and browser)
PHP
Python
Visual Basic

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Clojure
Java
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

File partitioning, horizontal partitioning, sharding

Customizable business rules for table partitioning

Sharding

yes

via pluggable storage backends

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes, configurable to be parallel or serial, synchronous or asynchronous, uni-directional or bi-directional, ACID-consistent or eventually consistent (with custom conflict resolution).

Multi-source replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Faunus, a graph analytics engine

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency
Tunable consistency per server, database, table, and transaction

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graph

Transaction concepts

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

tunable from ACID to Eventually Consistent

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

Yes, tunable from durable to delayed durability to in-memory

yes

Supports various storage backends: Cassandra, HBase, Berkeley DB, Akiban, Hazelcast

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

User concepts

Access control

Fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard with additional protections for files

rights management via user accounts

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

User authentification and security via Rexster Graph Server

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.