DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. Linter vs. OrigoDB vs. Rockset

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BigObject vs. Linter vs. OrigoDB vs. Rockset

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

RDBMS for high security requirements

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

A scalable, reliable search and analytics service in the cloud, built on RocksDB

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

a hierachical model (tree) can be imposed

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Relational DBMS
Search engine

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	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#53	Document stores
	#20	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.79
Rank	#211	Overall
	#35	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.bigobject.io

origodb.com/docs

docs.rockset.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

BigObject, Inc.

relex.ru

Robert Friberg et al

Rockset

Initial release

2012

2015

1990

2009

under the name LiveDB

2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

commercial

Open Source

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 and C++

C++

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)

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Linux
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

dynamic typing

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.

can be achieved using .NET

ingestion from XML files supported

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

all fields are automatically indexed

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

Read-only SQL queries, including JOINs

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

fluentd
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

HTTP REST

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

.Net

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Lua

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

yes

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Automatic sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication

yes

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

Eventual Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

automatically between fact table and dimension tables

yes

depending on model

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

Write ahead log

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

Role based authorization

Access rights for users and organizations can be defined via Rockset console

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.