DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Netezza vs. Qdrant vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Microsoft Azure Synapse Analytics vs. Netezza vs. Qdrant vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Elastic, large scale data warehouse service leveraging the broad eco-system of SQL Server

Data warehouse and analytics appliance part of IBM PureSystems

A high-performance vector database with neural network or semantic-based matching

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

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Relational DBMS

Vector DBMS

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	20.56
Rank	#31	Overall
	#19	Relational DBMS

Score	9.06
Rank	#46	Overall
	#29	Relational DBMS

Score	1.16
Rank	#175	Overall
	#6	Vector DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

azure.microsoft.com/services/synapse-analytics

www.ibm.com/products/netezza

github.com/qdrant/qdrant
qdrant.tech

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.microsoft.com/azure/synapse-analytics

qdrant.tech/documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Microsoft

IBM

Qdrant

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2016

2000

2021

2014

Current release

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

C++

Rust

Server operating systems

Linux

hosted

Linux

included in appliance

Docker
Linux
macOS
Windows

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

Numbers, Strings, Geo, Boolean

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

Keywords, numberic ranges, geo, full-text

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
OLE DB

gRPC
OpenAPI 3.0
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

OpenAPI 3.0

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

C#
Java
PHP

C
C++
Fortran
Java
Lua
Perl
Python
R

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

Transact SQL

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Sharding, horizontal partitioning

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

Source-replica replication

Collection-level 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

Eventual Consistency, tunable consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/synapse-analytics/sql-data-warehouse/sql-data-warehouse-table-constraints

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

rights management via user accounts

yes

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

Key-based authentication

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.