DBMS > Hazelcast vs. Linter vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison Hazelcast vs. Linter vs. RDFox vs. Snowflake vs. STSdb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

RDBMS for high security requirements

High performance knowledge graph and semantic reasoning engine

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

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	5.46
Rank	#61	Overall
	#7	Key-value stores

Score	0.12
Rank	#350	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#300	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.10
Rank	#357	Overall
	#51	Key-value stores

Website

hazelcast.com

linter.ru

www.oxfordsemantic.tech

www.snowflake.com

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.oxfordsemantic.tech

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Hazelcast

relex.ru

Oxford Semantic Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2008

1990

2017

2014

2011

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

6.0, Septermber 2022

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license available

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++

C++

Server operating systems

All OS with a Java VM

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

Linux
macOS
Windows

hosted

Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

RDF schemas

yes

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

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

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

RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

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

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

C
Java

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Events

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

replication via a shared file system

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in stand-alone mode, Eventual Consistency in replicated setups

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

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

ACID

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

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Roles, resources, and access types

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.