DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. BoltDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. mSQL

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. BoltDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable vs. mSQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Google's NoSQL Big Data database service. It's the same database that powers many core Google services, including Search, Analytics, Maps, and Gmail.

mSQL (Mini SQL) is a simple and lightweight RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	0.70
Rank	#225	Overall
	#31	Key-value stores

Score	2.97
Rank	#92	Overall
	#15	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Score	1.26
Rank	#163	Overall
	#74	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/boltdb/bolt

cloud.google.com/bigtable

hughestech.com.au/products/msql

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Google

Hughes Technologies

Initial release

2012

2013

2015

1994

Current release

4.4, October 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

free licenses can be provided

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

Server operating systems

hosted

BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

hosted

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

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

no subqueries, aggregate functions, views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HappyBase (Python library)
HBase compatible API (Java)

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
PHP
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Internal replication in Colossus, and regional replication between two clusters in different zones

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Immediate consistency (for a single cluster), Eventual consistency (for two or more replicated clusters)

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

Atomic single-row operations

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

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.