DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Citus vs. RDFox

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Citus vs. RDFox

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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 hybrid operational and analytics RDBMS for big data use cases based on PostgreSQL

High performance knowledge graph and semantic reasoning engine

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Secondary database models

Document store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	2.15
Rank	#117	Overall
	#56	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#300	Overall
	#24	Graph DBMS
	#13	RDF stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.citusdata.com

www.oxfordsemantic.tech

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.citusdata.com

docs.oxfordsemantic.tech

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Oxford Semantic Technologies

Initial release

2012

2016

2010

2017

Current release

1703

8.1, December 2018

6.0, Septermber 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL, commercial license also available

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

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

RDF schemas

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

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

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

standard, with numerous extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

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

RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL 1.1

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
Tcl

C
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

realized in proprietary language PL/pgSQL or with common languages like Perl, Python, Tcl etc.

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

other methods possible by using 3rd party extensions

replication via a shared file system

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

Immediate Consistency in stand-alone mode, Eventual Consistency in replicated setups

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

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

Roles, resources, and access types

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.