DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. RethinkDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. RethinkDB

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

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

DBMS for the Web with a mechanism to push updated query results to applications in realtime.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	4.36
Rank	#72	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	2.66
Rank	#107	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

cloud.google.com/datastore

rethinkdb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

rethinkdb.com/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

The Linux Foundation

since July 2017

Initial release

2012

2016

2008

2009

Current release

1703

2.4.1, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2

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

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes, details here

yes

string, binary, float, bool, date, geometry

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 (GQL)

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

community-supported driver
C#

community-supported driver
C++

community-supported driver
Clojure

community-supported driver
Dart

community-supported driver
Erlang

community-supported driver
Go

community-supported driver
Haskell

community-supported driver
Java

official driver
JavaScript (Node.js)

official driver
Lisp

community-supported driver
Lua

community-supported driver
Objective-C

community-supported driver
Perl

community-supported driver
PHP

community-supported driver
Python

official driver
Ruby

official driver
Scala

community-supported driver

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

using Google App Engine

Triggers

yes

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

Client-side triggers through changefeeds

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

Sharding

range based

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication using Paxos

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

Atomic single-document operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

MVCC based

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

yes

users and table-level permissions

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.