DBMS > Google BigQuery vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison Google BigQuery vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. PlanetScale

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service with append-only tables

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

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

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	58.10
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Score	1.64
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	4.04
Rank	#77	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigquery

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

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

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

docs.heavy.ai

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

Google

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Microsoft

PlanetScale

Initial release

2010

2016

2012

2020

Current release

5.10, January 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition 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.

Implementation language

C++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

hosted

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in JavaScript

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

Round robin

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

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

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

Since BigQuery is designed for querying data

optimistic locking

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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 privileges (owner, writer, reader) on dataset, table or view level

Google Cloud Identity & Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.