DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Apache IoTDB vs. Graph Engine vs. searchxml

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Apache IoTDB vs. Graph Engine vs. searchxml

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

An IoT native database with high performance for data management and analysis, deployable on the edge and the cloud and integrated with Hadoop, Spark and Flink

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	1.18
Rank	#173	Overall
	#15	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

iotdb.apache.org

www.graphengine.io

www.searchxml.net/category/products

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

iotdb.apache.org/UserGuide/Master/QuickStart/QuickStart.html

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

Microsoft

informationpartners gmbh

Initial release

2012

2018

2010

2015

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

MIT License

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

Java

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

.NET

Windows

Data scheme

yes

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
Native API

RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

on the application server

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning (by time range) + vertical partitioning (by deviceId)

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication methods; using Raft/IoTConsensus algorithm to ensure strong/eventual data consistency among multiple replicas

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Integration with Hadoop and Spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Strong Consistency with Raft

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

multiple readers, single writer

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

yes

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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.