DBMS > searchxml vs. Sequoiadb vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison searchxml vs. Sequoiadb vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

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

Primary database model

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Score	0.45
Rank	#261	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#122	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

www.searchxml.net/category/products

www.sequoiadb.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

informationpartners gmbh

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2015

2013

2014

Current release

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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++

Server operating systems

Windows

Linux

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

SQL-like query language

yes

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

proprietary protocol using JSON

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

on the application server

JavaScript

user defined functions

Triggers

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

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

Source-replica replication

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

multiple readers, single writer

Document is locked during a transaction

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.

User concepts

Access control

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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.