DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Badger vs. OpenQM vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Badger vs. OpenQM vs. STSdb

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

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

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

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.22
Rank	#320	Overall
	#47	Key-value stores

Score	0.34
Rank	#284	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	0.10
Rank	#357	Overall
	#51	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/dgraph-io/badger

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

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

DGraph Labs

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2012

2017

1993

2011

Current release

3.4-12

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

GPLv2, 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

Server operating systems

hosted

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

none

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

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

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.