DBMS > Firebolt vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Firebolt vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. MySQL vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Highly scalable cloud data warehouse and analytics product

Forked from Clickhouse

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Widely used open source RDBMS

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.73
Rank	#140	Overall
	#63	Relational DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1061.34
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

www.firebolt.io

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.mysql.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.firebolt.io

dev.mysql.com/doc

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

Microsoft

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2020

2012

1995

2014

Current release

8.4.0, April 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

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.

Aiven for MySQL: Fully managed MySQL, deployable in the cloud of your choice, with seamless integrations and lightning-fast setup.

Implementation language

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

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

with proprietary extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

depending on storage layer

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

yes

Transaction concepts

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

optimistic locking

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.