DBMS > HEAVY.AI vs. RavenDB vs. Snowflake vs. Transbase

System Properties Comparison HEAVY.AI vs. RavenDB vs. Snowflake vs. Transbase

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

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

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	1.77
Rank	#141	Overall
	#65	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#341	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Website

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

ravendb.net

www.snowflake.com

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

Technical documentation

docs.heavy.ai

ravendb.net/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

Developer

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Hibernating Rhinos

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Transaction Software GmbH

Initial release

2016

2010

2014

1987

Current release

5.10, January 2022

5.4, July 2022

Transbase 8.3, 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

commercial

free development license

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

Linux

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language (RQL)

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

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

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Authorization levels configured per client per database

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.