DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Badger vs. Memcached vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Badger vs. Memcached vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

An embeddable, persistent, simple and fast Key-Value Store, written purely in Go.

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#331	Overall
	#49	Key-value stores

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

www.memcached.org

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

godoc.org/github.com/dgraph-io/badger

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

DGraph Labs

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2017

2003

2009

Current release

1.6.27, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

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

Server operating systems

hosted

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Proprietary protocol

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

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

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

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.