DBMS > Immudb vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Immudb vs. Infobright vs. JaguarDB vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

An open source immutable (append-only) database with cryptographic verification which makes it tamper-resistant and fully auditable.

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

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

Primary database model

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.24
Rank	#305	Overall
	#43	Key-value stores

Score	0.96
Rank	#194	Overall
	#91	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/codenotary/immudb
immudb.io

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

www.jaguardb.com

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.immudb.io

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Codenotary

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

DataJaguar, Inc.

IBM

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2020

2005

2015

2000

2014

Current release

1.2.3, April 2022

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

BSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows
z/OS

Linux
Windows

Linux

included in appliance

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

yes

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like syntax

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

gRPC protocol
PostgreSQL wire protocol

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

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

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

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

rights management via user accounts

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

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.