DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Hypertable

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. AnzoGraph DB vs. Ehcache vs. Hypertable

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hypertable has stopped its further development with March 2016 and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Scalable graph database built for online analytics and data harmonization with MPP scaling, high-performance analytical algorithms and reasoning, and virtualization

A widely adopted Java cache with tiered storage options

An open source BigTable implementation based on distributed file systems such as Hadoop

Primary database model

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#303	Overall
	#25	Graph DBMS
	#14	RDF stores

Score	4.64
Rank	#68	Overall
	#8	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph

www.ehcache.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.cambridgesemantics.com/anzograph/userdoc/home.htm

www.ehcache.org/documentation

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Cambridge Semantics

Terracotta Inc, owned by Software AG

Hypertable Inc.

Initial release

2012

2018

2009

Current release

2.3, January 2021

3.10.0, March 2022

0.9.8.11, March 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free trial version available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GNU version 3. 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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Linux
OS X
Windows

an inofficial Windows port is available

Data scheme

yes

Schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

only exact value or prefix value scans

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SPARQL and SPARQL* as primary query language. Cypher preview.

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Apache Mule
gRPC
JDBC
Kafka
OData access for BI tools
OpenCypher
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL

JCache

C++ API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C++
Java
Python

Java

C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions and aggregates

Triggers

yes

Cache Event Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Automatic sharding

Sharding

by using Terracotta Server

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication in MPP-Cluster

yes

by using Terracotta Server

selectable replication factor on file system level

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Kerberos/HDFS data loading

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in MPP-Cluster

Tunable Consistency (Strong, Eventual, Weak)

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

not needed in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

supports JTA and can work as an XA resource

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using a tiered cache-storage approach

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

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and roles

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.