DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Memcached vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Lovefield vs. Memcached vs. Netezza vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

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
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

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

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

google.github.io/lovefield

www.memcached.org

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

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

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Google

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

IBM

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2014

2003

2000

2014

Current release

3.3 July 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

1.6.25, March 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD license

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

JavaScript

Server operating systems

Linux

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

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Linux

included in appliance

hosted

Data scheme

yes

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

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

JavaScript

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

Using read-only observers

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

Multi-source replication

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

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

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

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

rights management via user accounts

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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.