DBMS > Linter vs. Machbase Neo vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Linter vs. Machbase Neo vs. Oracle Rdb vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

RDBMS for high security requirements

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.10
Rank	#350	Overall
	#153	Relational DBMS

Score	0.22
Rank	#324	Overall
	#29	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.08
Rank	#187	Overall
	#85	Relational DBMS

Score	123.20
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

linter.ru

machbase.com

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

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

machbase.com/dbms

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/rdb-doc.html

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

relex.ru

Machbase

Oracle, originally developed by Digital Equipment Corporation (DEC)

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

1990

2013

1984

2014

Current release

V8.0, August 2023

7.4.1.1, 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free test version available

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 and C++

Server operating systems

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

HP Open VMS

hosted

Data scheme

yes

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, 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

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes, on a single node

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

volatile and lookup table

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

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.