DBMS > etcd vs. OrigoDB vs. Realm vs. Snowflake vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison etcd vs. OrigoDB vs. Realm vs. Snowflake vs. STSdb

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

A distributed reliable key-value store

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

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

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	7.60
Rank	#52	Overall
	#9	Document stores

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#360	Overall
	#52	Key-value stores

Website

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

origodb.com

realm.io

www.snowflake.com

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

origodb.com/docs

realm.io/docs

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Robert Friberg et al

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Snowflake Computing Inc.

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2009

under the name LiveDB

2014

2011

Current release

3.4, August 2019

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license available

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

Server operating systems

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
Windows

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

hosted

Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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.

can be achieved using .NET

yes

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

APIs and other access methods

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.Net

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

user defined functions

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Domain Events

yes

Change Listeners

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

Source-replica replication

none

yes

none

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

depending on model

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

Write ahead log

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

In-Memory realm

User concepts

Access control

Role based authorization

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.