DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hyprcubd vs. QuestDB vs. Splice Machine

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Hyprcubd vs. QuestDB vs. Splice Machine

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

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

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded 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

Serverless Time Series DBMS

A high performance open source SQL database for time series data

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	2.52
Rank	#109	Overall
	#9	Time Series DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#250	Overall
	#114	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

hyprcubd.com (offline)

questdb.io

splicemachine.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

questdb.io/docs

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Hyprcubd, Inc.

QuestDB Technology Inc

Splice Machine

Initial release

2012

2016

2014

Current release

1703

3.1, March 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

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 (Zero-GC), C++, Rust

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free via InfluxDB Line Protocol

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

optional

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

SQL with time-series extensions

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

gRPC (https)

HTTP REST
InfluxDB Line Protocol (TCP/UDP)
JDBC
PostgreSQL wire protocol

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

PostgreSQL driver
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

over HTTP

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

horizontal partitioning (by timestamps)

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication with eventual consistency

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Eventual Consistency

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 for single-table writes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

through memory mapped files

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

LDAP bind authentication

token access

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

More information provided by the system vendor

Specific characteristics

Relational model with native time series support Column-based storage and time partitioned...
» more

Competitive advantages

High ingestion throughput: peak of 4M rows/sec (TSBS Benchmark) Code optimizations...
» more

Typical application scenarios

Financial tick data Industrial IoT Application Metrics Monitoring
» more

Key customers

Banks & Hedge funds, Yahoo, OKX, Airbus, Aquis Exchange, Net App, Cloudera, Airtel,...
» more

Licensing and pricing models

Open source Apache 2.0 QuestDB Enterprise QuestDB Cloud
» more

News

QuestDB and Raspberry Pi 5 benchmark, a pocket-sized powerhouse
8 May 2024

Build your own resource monitor with QuestDB and Grafana
6 May 2024

Does "vpmovzxbd" Scare You? Here's Why it Doesn't Have To
12 April 2024

Create an ADS-B flight radar with QuestDB and a Raspberry Pi
8 April 2024

Build a temperature IoT sensor with Raspberry Pi Pico & QuestDB
5 April 2024

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.