We performed a comparison between CockroachDB and SAP IQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"I use CockroachDB to test big data samples and to create the best structure for databases. We have four users and required 10 people for deployment and maintenance."
"Valuable features for us include the compression, speed, fast response time, and easy object maintenance."
"It is very robust for ad hoc DW queries and its columnar compression is unique and valuable."
"The primary benefit of SAP IQ is its ability to limit the expansion of the costly SAP HANA database, which has limited storage capacity. This necessitates a form of data management that involves moving data from SAP HANA to SAP NLS, which is essentially archiving. This allows us to retain access to the data via a link whenever it is required."
"Unbeatable speed and compression with a colummn-structured relational database."
"Columnar storage allows high compression, high load rates and high query performance."
"The column-based technologies (basically all the database for ITP) are used for SAP IQ. It is used as a column-based solution."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"Multiplex is very problematic. There are consistency problems in the metadata, meaning it is possible to lose metadata consistency. You should make sure you have healthy backups."
"Concurrency and functional error messaging."
"I think the universe should be part of the Sybase IQ tool set."
"The solution works best when combined with other SAP solutions. If the environment has other systems other options might be better."
"The room for improvement would be the marketing of the product, because this product is much better than advertised."
"The organization who owns the product does not support it well and appears not to be doing significant development for the future."
CockroachDB is ranked 9th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while SAP IQ is ranked 21st in Relational Databases Tools with 17 reviews. CockroachDB is rated 8.0, while SAP IQ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CockroachDB writes "Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAP IQ writes "Easy to use, highly stable, but integration could improve". CockroachDB is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, Citus Data, Amazon Aurora and SQL Server, whereas SAP IQ is most compared with Snowflake, SQL Server, SAP HANA, Apache Hadoop and SAP BW4HANA. See our CockroachDB vs. SAP IQ report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.