DBMS > Hypertable vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. mSQL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Hypertable vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. mSQL vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

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

Primary database model

Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	1.27
Rank	#167	Overall
	#77	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

google.github.io/lovefield

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Hypertable Inc.

Google

Microsoft

Hughes Technologies

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2009

2014

2010

1994

2014

Current release

0.9.8.11, March 2016

2.1.12, February 2017

V12

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GNU version 3. Commercial license available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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++

JavaScript

C++

Server operating systems

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

hosted

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

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

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

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

C++ API
Thrift

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

JavaScript

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

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

user defined functions

Triggers

Using read-only observers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

selectable replication factor on file system level

none

yes, with always 3 replicas available

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

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

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.