DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Apache Drill vs. Apache Druid vs. HarperDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Apache Drill vs. Apache Druid vs. HarperDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Schema-free SQL Query Engine for Hadoop, NoSQL and Cloud Storage

Open-source analytics data store designed for sub-second OLAP queries on high dimensionality and high cardinality data

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS
Time Series DBMS

Document store

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	1.95
Rank	#127	Overall
	#23	Document stores
	#60	Relational DBMS

Score	3.34
Rank	#88	Overall
	#48	Relational DBMS
	#7	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

drill.apache.org

druid.apache.org

www.harperdb.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

drill.apache.org/docs

druid.apache.org/docs/latest/design

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

Apache Software Foundation and contributors

HarperDB

Initial release

2012

2017

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

29.0.1, April 2024

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

Open Source

Apache license v2

commercial

free community edition 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

Node.js

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
OS X
Unix

Linux
OS X

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-less columns are supported

dynamic schema

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

SQL for querying

SQL-like data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C++

Clojure
JavaScript
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

manual/auto, time-based

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes, via HDFS, S3 or other storage engines

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

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

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

yes, using LMDB

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Depending on the underlying data source

RBAC using LDAP or Druid internals for users and groups for read/write by datasource and system

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.