DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Apache Drill vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. IBM Db2

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Apache Drill vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. IBM Db2

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

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

Common in IBM host environments, 2 different versions for host and Windows/Linux

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

Since Version 10.5 support for JSON/BSON documents compatible with MongoDB

Secondary database models

Document store
RDF store

in Db2 LUW (Linux, Unix, Windows)
Spatial DBMS

with Db2 Spatial Extender

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#124	Overall
	#22	Document stores
	#59	Relational DBMS

Score	3.15
Rank	#95	Overall
	#14	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	125.90
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

drill.apache.org

cloud.google.com/bigtable

www.ibm.com/products/db2

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

drill.apache.org/docs

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

Google

IBM

Initial release

2012

2015

1983

host version

Current release

1.20.3, January 2023

12.1, October 2016

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

commercial

free version is 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

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
Solaris
Windows
z/OS

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL SELECT statement is SQL:2003 compliant

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

ADO.NET
JDBC
JSON style queries

MongoDB compatible
ODBC
XQuery

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C++

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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

only with Windows/Unix/Linux Version

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

yes

with separate tools (MQ, InfoSphere)

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 (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic single-row operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Depending on the underlying data source

yes

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Depending on the underlying data source

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

fine grained access rights 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.