DBMS > Interbase vs. Sequoiadb vs. Snowflake vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison Interbase vs. Sequoiadb vs. Snowflake vs. Vitess

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Light-weight proven RDBMS

originally from Borland

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

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

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	4.08
Rank	#75	Overall
	#41	Relational DBMS

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Score	0.88
Rank	#203	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

www.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

www.sequoiadb.com

www.snowflake.com

vitess.io

Technical documentation

docs.embarcadero.com/products/interbase

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Embarcadero

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

1984

2013

2014

2013

Current release

InterBase 2020, December 2019

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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

C++

Server operating systems

Android
iOS
Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

hosted

Docker
Linux
macOS

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

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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.

export as XML data possible

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

proprietary protocol using JSON

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Object Pascal
PHP
Ruby

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

Interbase procedure and trigger language

JavaScript

user defined functions

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Interbase Change Views

Source-replica replication

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Document is locked during a transaction

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Multiversion concurreny control

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

simple password-based access control

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.