DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Axibase vs. Datomic vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Axibase vs. Datomic vs. Vitess

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Scalable TimeSeries DBMS based on HBase with integrated rule engine and visualization

Datomic builds on immutable values, supports point-in-time queries and uses 3rd party systems for durability

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.35
Rank	#282	Overall
	#25	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.66
Rank	#144	Overall
	#66	Relational DBMS

Score	0.88
Rank	#203	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

axibase.com/docs/atsd/finance

www.datomic.com

vitess.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.datomic.com

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Axibase Corporation

Cognitect

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2013

2012

2013

Current release

15585

1.0.7075, December 2023

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Community Edition (single node) is free, Enterprise Edition (distributed) is paid

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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, Clojure

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

All OS with a Java VM

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

short, integer, long, float, double, decimal, 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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
Proprietary protocol (Network API)
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Java
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

Clojure
Java

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Transaction Functions

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

By using transaction functions

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using external storage systems (e.g. Cassandra, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Couchbase and others)

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

recommended only for testing and development

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.