DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. Cachelot.io vs. IBM Cloudant

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. Cachelot.io vs. IBM Cloudant

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

Analytic DBMS for real-time computations and queries

In-memory caching system

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Key-value store

Document store

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

bigobject.io

cachelot.io

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.bigobject.io

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

BigObject, Inc.

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Initial release

2012

2015

2010

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

Simplified 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

C++

Erlang

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

distributed as a docker-image
OS X

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)
Windows

distributed as a docker-image (boot2docker)

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Memcached protocol

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Lua

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

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

none

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

atomic operations within a document possible

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

yes

Optimistic locking

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 for users can be defined per database

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.