DBMS > Linter vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

System Properties Comparison Linter vs. Snowflake vs. TinkerGraph

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

RDBMS for high security requirements

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

A lightweight, in-memory graph engine that serves as a reference implementation of the TinkerPop3 API

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.08
Rank	#348	Overall
	#35	Graph DBMS

Website

linter.ru

www.snowflake.com

tinkerpop.apache.org/docs/current/reference/#tinkergraph-gremlin

Technical documentation

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

relex.ru

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

1990

2014

2009

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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++

Java

Server operating systems

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

hosted

Data scheme

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

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

APIs and other access methods

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

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Groovy
Java

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

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Relationships in graphs

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

optional

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

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.