DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. EXASOL vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. EXASOL vs. Snowflake

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

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.13
Rank	#333	Overall
	#147	Relational DBMS

Score	1.99
Rank	#124	Overall
	#58	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

bigobject.io

www.exasol.com

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.bigobject.io

www.exasol.com/resources

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

BigObject, Inc.

Exasol

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2012

2015

2000

2014

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition 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

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)

hosted

Data scheme

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

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.

yes

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java
Lua
Python
R

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Lua

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Hadoop integration

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

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/write lock on objects (tables, trees)

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 for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.