DBMS > Graph Engine vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Postgres-XL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Postgres-XL vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

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

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Based on PostgreSQL enhanced with MPP and write-scale-out cluster features

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

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	0.49
Rank	#256	Overall
	#117	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

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

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

www.postgres-xl.org

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.heavy.ai

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

www.postgres-xl.org/documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Microsoft

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Microsoft

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2010

2016

2010

2014

since 2012, originally named StormDB

2014

Current release

5.10, January 2022

V12

10 R1, October 2018

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

Open Source

Mozilla public license

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

.NET and C

C++ and CUDA

C++

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux

hosted

Linux
macOS

hosted

Data scheme

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

XML type, but no XML query functionality

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

distributed, parallel query execution

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

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

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Erlang
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Transact SQL

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Round robin

horizontal partitioning

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes, with always 3 replicas available

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

MVCC

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.