DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Apache IoTDB vs. OrigoDB vs. Realm

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Apache IoTDB vs. OrigoDB vs. Realm

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 fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	1.31
Rank	#164	Overall
	#14	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#19	Object oriented DBMS

Score	7.41
Rank	#52	Overall
	#8	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

iotdb.apache.org

origodb.com

realm.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

origodb.com/docs

realm.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

Robert Friberg et al

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Initial release

2012

2018

2009

under the name LiveDB

2014

Current release

1.1.0, April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

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

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM (>= 1.8)

Linux
Windows

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

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

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
Python
Scala

.Net

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

yes

Change Listeners

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

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

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

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

Source-replica replication

none

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

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

In-Memory realm

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

Role based authorization

yes

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.