DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BigchainDB vs. Brytlyt vs. GeoMesa vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BigchainDB vs. Brytlyt vs. GeoMesa vs. Vitess

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

BigchainDB is scalable blockchain database offering decentralization, immutability and native assets

Scalable GPU-accelerated RDBMS for very fast analytic and streaming workloads, leveraging PostgreSQL

GeoMesa is a distributed spatio-temporal DBMS based on various systems as storage layer.

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.85
Rank	#208	Overall
	#35	Document stores

Score	0.38
Rank	#276	Overall
	#127	Relational DBMS

Score	0.86
Rank	#205	Overall
	#4	Spatial DBMS

Score	0.88
Rank	#203	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

docs.brytlyt.io

www.geomesa.org/documentation/stable/user/index.html

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Brytlyt

CCRi and others

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2016

2014

2013

Current release

5.0, August 2023

5.0.0, May 2024

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL v3

commercial

Open Source

Apache License 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses 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

Python

C, C++ and CUDA

Scala

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

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

specific XML-type available, but no XML query functionality.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

depending on storage layer

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

depending on storage layer

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

depending on storage layer

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes,with MongoDB ord RethinkDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

depending on storage layer

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

depending on the DBMS used for storage

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.