DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine vs. TerarkDB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BaseX vs. Graph Engine vs. TerarkDB vs. TigerGraph

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Light-weight Native XML DBMS with support for XQuery 3.0 and interactive GUI.

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Native XML DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Key-value store

Graph DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	1.84
Rank	#135	Overall
	#4	Native XML DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#367	Overall
	#56	Key-value stores

Score	1.80
Rank	#138	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

basex.org

www.graphengine.io

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.basex.org

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

BaseX GmbH

Microsoft

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2012

2007

2010

2016

2017

Current release

10.7, August 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD license

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

restricted open source version available

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

Java

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

.NET

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

XQuery supports types

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 (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
RESTXQ
WebDAV
XML:DB
XQJ

RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Java API

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Actionscript
C
C#
Haskell
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Lisp
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Rebol
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Triggers

yes

via events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

multiple readers, single writer

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept on 4 levels

Role-based access control

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.