DBMS > Google BigQuery vs. Hazelcast vs. Linter vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison Google BigQuery vs. Hazelcast vs. Linter 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 widely adopted in-memory data grid

RDBMS for high security requirements

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	60.38
Rank	#19	Overall
	#13	Relational DBMS

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	1.59
Rank	#151	Overall
	#70	Relational DBMS

Website

cloud.google.com/bigquery

hazelcast.com

linter.ru

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

cloud.google.com/bigquery/docs

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

Google

Hazelcast

relex.ru

PlanetScale

Initial release

2010

2008

1990

2020

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses 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

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

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

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

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

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

ACID

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)

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.