DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Brytlyt vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Brytlyt vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. SiriDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

Scalable GPU-accelerated RDBMS for very fast analytic and streaming workloads, leveraging PostgreSQL

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Open Source Time Series DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#288	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

brytlyt.io

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

siridb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.brytlyt.io

docs.siridb.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Brytlyt

Microsoft

Cesbit

Initial release

2012

2016

2012

2017

Current release

1703

5.0, August 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

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, C++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

Numeric data

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

specific XML-type available, but no XML query functionality.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

.Net
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
R

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

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 execution of specific operations

ACID

optimistic locking

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

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

LDAP bind authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

simple rights management via user accounts

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.