DBMS > HEAVY.AI vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. Snowflake vs. Splice Machine vs. TimesTen

System Properties Comparison HEAVY.AI vs. IBM Db2 warehouse vs. Snowflake vs. Splice Machine vs. TimesTen

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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

Cloud-based data warehousing service

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

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	1.30
Rank	#164	Overall
	#75	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#250	Overall
	#114	Relational DBMS

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

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

www.ibm.com/products/db2/warehouse

www.snowflake.com

splicemachine.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

Developer

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

IBM

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Splice Machine

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

Initial release

2016

2014

1998

Current release

5.10, January 2022

3.1, March 2021

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license 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

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Data scheme

yes

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

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

.NET Client API
JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

PL/SQL, SQL PL

user defined functions

yes

Java

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

Sharding

yes

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.