DBMS > Hypertable vs. Impala
System Properties Comparison Hypertable vs. Impala
Please select another system to include it in the comparison.
Our visitors often compare Hypertable and Impala with PostgreSQL, HBase and MongoDB.
|Editorial information provided by DB-Engines|
|Name||Hypertable Xexclude from comparison||Impala Xexclude from comparison|
|Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.|
|Description||An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop||Analytic DBMS for Hadoop|
|Primary database model||Wide column store||Relational DBMS|
|Secondary database models||Document store|
|Current release||0.9.8.11, March 2016||4.1.0, June 2022|
|License Commercial or Open Source||Open Source GNU version 3. Commercial license available||Open Source Apache Version 2|
|Cloud-based only Only available as a cloud service||no||no|
|DBaaS offerings (sponsored links) Database as a Service|
Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.
|Server operating systems||Linux|
Windows an inofficial Windows port is available
|Typing predefined data types such as float or date||no||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.||no|
|Secondary indexes||restricted only exact value or prefix value scans||yes|
|SQL Support of SQL||no||SQL-like DML and DDL statements|
|APIs and other access methods||C++ API|
|Supported programming languages||C++|
|All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC|
|Server-side scripts Stored procedures||no||yes user defined functions and integration of map-reduce|
|Partitioning methods Methods for storing different data on different nodes||Sharding||Sharding|
|Replication methods Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes||selectable replication factor on file system level||selectable replication factor|
|MapReduce Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods||yes||yes query execution via MapReduce|
|Consistency concepts Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system||Immediate Consistency||Eventual Consistency|
|Foreign keys Referential integrity||no||no|
|Transaction concepts Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data||no||no|
|Concurrency Support for concurrent manipulation of data||yes||yes|
|Durability Support for making data persistent||yes||yes|
|In-memory capabilities Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.||no|
|User concepts Access control||no||Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Apache Sentry and Kerberos|
More information provided by the system vendor
We invite representatives of system vendors to contact us for updating and extending the system information,
Related products and services
We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.
|Recent citations in the news|
NoSQL Database Market 2023 to See Huge Growth by 2029 ...
TimescaleDB goes distributed; implements ‘Chunking’ over ‘Sharding’ for scaling-out
Why We Built Cloud Native Object Storage for PostgreSQL with ...
NoSQL Market: A well-defined technological growth map with an ...
Timescale Announces TimescaleDB 1.0—Empowering ...
provided by Google News
Cloudera's Impala brings Hadoop to SQL and BI
Cloudera aims to bring real-time queries to Hadoop, big data
Man Busts Out of Google, Rebuilds Top-Secret Query Machine
Cloudera Boosts Hadoop App Development On Impala
Impala vs Hive: Difference between Sql on Hadoop components
provided by Google News
Planning Engineer II
Planning Engineer II - Works From Home
Senior Database Engineer
Staff Software Engineer(Data Modeling/SQL + Visualization + Analytics)
Director, Commercial Data Science and Decision Analytics - Brand Analytics
Share this page