DBMS > 4D vs. Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. EXASOL

System Properties Comparison 4D vs. Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. EXASOL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Application development environment with integrated database management system

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

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

Score	2.58
Rank	#108	Overall
	#54	Relational DBMS

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	1.99
Rank	#124	Overall
	#58	Relational DBMS

Website

www.4d.com

aws.amazon.com/redshift

bigobject.io

www.exasol.com

Technical documentation

developer.4d.com

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.bigobject.io

www.exasol.com/resources

Developer

4D, Inc

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

BigObject, Inc.

Exasol

Initial release

1984

2012

2015

2000

Current release

v20, April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition 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

Server operating systems

OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

Data scheme

yes

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

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

close to SQL 92

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

by using 4D Mobile
SOAP webservices

JDBC
ODBC

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

4D proprietary IDE
PHP

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java
Lua
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

in Python

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Multi-source replication

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Hadoop integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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

User concepts

Access control

Users and groups

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

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.