DBMS > FatDB vs. GeoMesa vs. LevelDB vs. Snowflake vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. GeoMesa vs. LevelDB vs. Snowflake vs. TimesTen

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

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

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

Embeddable fast key-value storage library that provides an ordered mapping from string keys to string values

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

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Spatial DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.78
Rank	#213	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	2.35
Rank	#111	Overall
	#19	Key-value stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

www.geomesa.org

github.com/google/leveldb

www.snowflake.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

github.com/google/leveldb/blob/main/doc/index.md

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

FatCloud

CCRi and others

Google

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2012

2014

2011

2014

1998

Current release

4.0.5, February 2024

1.23, February 2021

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

BSD

commercial

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

Scala

C++

Server operating systems

Windows

Illumos
Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

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

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

C++
Go
Java

3rd party binding
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Python

3rd party binding

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

via applications

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

depending on storage layer

none

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

depending on storage layer

none

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

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

depending on storage layer

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

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

with automatic compression on writes

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

In-memory capabilities

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

depending on storage layer

yes

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

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.