DBMS > JaguarDB vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison JaguarDB vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. SAP HANA vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Widely used in-process key-value store

In-memory, column based data store. Available as appliance or cloud service

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

Primary database model

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS

with SAP Hana, Enterprise Edition
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.06
Rank	#381	Overall
	#59	Key-value stores
	#15	Vector DBMS

Score	2.01
Rank	#126	Overall
	#21	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	44.27
Rank	#23	Overall
	#16	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

www.jaguardb.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

www.sap.com/products/hana.html

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

help.sap.com/hana

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

DataJaguar, Inc.

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

SAP

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

1994

2010

2014

Current release

3.3 July 2023

18.1.40, May 2020

2.0 SPS07 (April 4, 2023), April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPL V3.0

Open Source

commercial license available

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

also available as a cloud based 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, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

Server operating systems

Linux

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Appliance or cloud-service

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

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

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

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

SQLScript, R

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

only for the SQL API

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

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

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

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, 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.