DBMS > Amazon Aurora vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Hazelcast vs. Sphinx

System Properties Comparison Amazon Aurora vs. Amazon Redshift vs. Hazelcast vs. Sphinx

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

MySQL and PostgreSQL compatible cloud service by Amazon

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Open source search engine for searching in data from different sources, e.g. relational databases

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Search engine

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	8.50
Rank	#49	Overall
	#31	Relational DBMS

Score	19.03
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	6.87
Rank	#55	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	6.03
Rank	#60	Overall
	#6	Search engines

Website

aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora

aws.amazon.com/redshift

hazelcast.com

sphinxsearch.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/AuroraUserGuide/CHAP_Aurora.html

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

sphinxsearch.com/docs

Developer

Amazon

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Hazelcast

Sphinx Technologies Inc.

Initial release

2015

2012

2008

2001

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

3.5.1, February 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GPL version 2, commercial licence 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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
NetBSD
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

yes

restricted

yes

full-text index on all search fields

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

SQL-like query language (SphinxQL)

APIs and other access methods

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol

Supported programming languages

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

C++

unofficial client library
Java
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

Triggers

yes

Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Partitioning is done manually, search queries against distributed index is supported

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

Source-replica replication

yes

Replicated Map

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

The original contents of fields are not stored in the Sphinx index.

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

Role-based access control

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.