DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GigaSpaces vs. SiriDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. GigaSpaces vs. SiriDB

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

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

Open Source Time Series DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph 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	0.97
Rank	#192	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#41	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.gigaspaces.com

siridb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

docs.siridb.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Gigaspaces Technologies

Cesbit

Initial release

2012

2016

2000

2017

Current release

1703

15.5, September 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

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

Java, C++, .Net

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

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

XML can be used for describing objects metadata

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Triggers

yes

yes, event driven architecture

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

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

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

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

Role-based access control

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.