DBMS > Graph Engine vs. Kinetica vs. OpenEdge vs. Sequoiadb vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Graph Engine vs. Kinetica vs. OpenEdge vs. Sequoiadb 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

Fully vectorized database across both GPUs and CPUs

Application development environment with integrated database management system

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

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

Primary database model

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.42
Rank	#261	Overall
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	3.69
Rank	#78	Overall
	#42	Relational DBMS

Score	0.42
Rank	#263	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#121	Relational DBMS

Score	133.72
Rank	#7	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

www.graphengine.io

www.kinetica.com

www.progress.com/openedge

www.sequoiadb.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.kinetica.com

documentation.progress.com/output/ua/OpenEdge_latest

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Microsoft

Kinetica

Progress Software Corporation

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2010

2012

1984

2013

2014

Current release

7.1, August 2021

OpenEdge 12.2, March 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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, C++

C++

Server operating systems

.NET

Linux

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows

Linux

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

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

close to SQL 92

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

proprietary protocol using JSON

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Progress proprietary ABL (Advanced Business Language)

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

JavaScript

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

triggers when inserted values for one or more columns fall within a specified range

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

since Version 11.4

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

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 or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Document is locked during a transaction

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

GPU vRAM or System RAM

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles on table level

Users and groups

simple password-based access control

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.