DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Blazegraph vs. MonetDB vs. Stardog

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Blazegraph vs. MonetDB vs. Stardog

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 relational database management system that stores data in columns

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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	1.72
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

blazegraph.com

www.monetdb.org

www.stardog.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

wiki.blazegraph.com

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Blazegraph

MonetDB BV

Stardog-Union

Initial release

2012

2006

2004

2010

Current release

2.1.5, March 2019

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

extended commercial license available

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 2.0

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SPARQL is used as query language

yes

SQL 2003 with some extensions

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL QUERY
SPARQL UPDATE
TinkerPop 3

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

yes, in SQL, C, R

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Sharding via remote tables

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

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 in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Relationships in Graphs

yes

relationships in graphs

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

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)

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users and 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.