DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. OpenQM vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. OpenQM vs. SWC-DB

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

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Multivalue DBMS

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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	77.99
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2012

2016

2010

1993

2020

Current release

1703

V12

3.4-12

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

GPL V3

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

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

with some exceptions

schema-free

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

LDAP

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Transact SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

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

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 can be defined down to the item level

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.