DBMS > FatDB vs. Snowflake vs. ToroDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison FatDB vs. Snowflake vs. ToroDB vs. Yaacomo

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.

ToroDB seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines Ranking.

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

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

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

A MongoDB-compatible JSON document store, built on top of PostgreSQL

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

www.snowflake.com

github.com/torodb/server

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

FatCloud

Snowflake Computing Inc.

8Kdata

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2014

2016

2009

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL-V3

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

Java

Server operating systems

Windows

hosted

All OS with a Java 7 VM

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, boolean, date, object_id

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

Supported programming languages

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

via applications

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

via applications

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor

yes

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

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.

yes

User concepts

Access control

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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

Access rights for users and roles

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.