DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Brytlyt vs. Lovefield vs. Prometheus vs. Qdrant

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Brytlyt vs. Lovefield vs. Prometheus vs. Qdrant

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

A high-performance vector database with neural network or semantic-based matching

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Vector DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#288	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	0.29
Rank	#293	Overall
	#133	Relational DBMS

Score	8.42
Rank	#47	Overall
	#2	Time Series DBMS

Score	1.16
Rank	#175	Overall
	#6	Vector DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

brytlyt.io

google.github.io/lovefield

prometheus.io

github.com/qdrant/qdrant
qdrant.tech

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.brytlyt.io

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

prometheus.io/docs

qdrant.tech/documentation

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Brytlyt

Google

Qdrant

Initial release

2012

2016

2014

2015

2021

Current release

5.0, August 2023

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

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

C, C++ and CUDA

JavaScript

Rust

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

Numbers, Strings, Geo, Boolean

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.

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

Keywords, numberic ranges, geo, full-text

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

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

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

gRPC
OpenAPI 3.0
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

OpenAPI 3.0

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java
Perl
Python
Tcl

JavaScript

.Net
C++
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Ruby

.Net
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

in PL/pgSQL

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

none

yes

by Federation

Collection-level replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Eventual Consistency, tunable consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

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, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Key-based 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.