DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BigchainDB vs. OrigoDB vs. TimesTen vs. VelocityDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BigchainDB vs. OrigoDB vs. TimesTen vs. VelocityDB

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

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

In-Memory RDBMS compatible to Oracle

A .NET Object Database that can be embedded/distributed and extended to a graph data model (VelocityGraph)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Object oriented DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.79
Rank	#212	Overall
	#36	Document stores

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

Score	1.31
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#358	Overall
	#36	Graph DBMS
	#16	Object oriented DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.bigchaindb.com

origodb.com

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/timesten.html

velocitydb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

bigchaindb.readthedocs.io/en/latest

origodb.com/docs

docs.oracle.com/database/timesten-18.1

velocitydb.com/UserGuide

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Robert Friberg et al

Oracle, TimesTen Performance Software, HP

originally founded in HP Labs it was acquired by Oracle in 2005

VelocityDB Inc

Initial release

2012

2016

2009

under the name LiveDB

1998

2011

Current release

11 Release 2 (11.2.2.8.0)

7.x

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL v3

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

Python

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
Windows

AIX
HP-UX
Linux
OS X
Solaris SPARC/x86
Windows

Any that supports .NET

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

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.

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

JDBC
ODBC
ODP.NET
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

.Net

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

.Net

C
C++
Java
PL/SQL

.Net

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

depending on model

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes,with MongoDB ord RethinkDB

yes

Write ahead log

yes

by means of logfiles and checkpoints

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

yes

Role based authorization

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Based on Windows 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.