DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Blazegraph vs. Hazelcast vs. searchxml

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Blazegraph vs. Hazelcast vs. searchxml

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Amazon has acquired Blazegraph's domain and (probably) product. It is said that Amazon Neptune is based on Blazegraph.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

High-performance graph database supporting Semantic Web (RDF/SPARQL) and Graph Database (tinkerpop3, blueprints, vertex-centric) APIs with scale-out and High Availability.

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

DBMS for structured and unstructured content wrapped with an application server

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

Key-value store

Native XML DBMS
Search engine

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.75
Rank	#219	Overall
	#19	Graph DBMS
	#8	RDF stores

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Native XML DBMS
	#25	Search engines

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

blazegraph.com

hazelcast.com

www.searchxml.net/category/products

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

wiki.blazegraph.com

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

www.searchxml.net/support/handouts

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Blazegraph

Hazelcast

informationpartners gmbh

Initial release

2012

2006

2008

2015

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

5.3.6, November 2023

1.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses 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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

All OS with a Java VM

Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

RDF literal types

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

yes

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SPARQL is used as query language

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API
WebDAV
XQuery
XSLT

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

.Net
C#
C++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

C++

most other programming languages supported via APIs

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

on the application server

Triggers

yes

Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

yes

sychronisation to multiple collections

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Relationships in Graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

multiple readers, single writer

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

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

Security and Authentication via Web Application Container (Tomcat, Jetty)

Role-based access control

Domain, group and role-based access control at the document level and for application services

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.