DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. CouchDB vs. FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. CouchDB vs. FatDB vs. HEAVY.AI

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A native JSON - document store inspired by Lotus Notes, scalable from globally distributed server-clusters down to mobile phones.

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	7.46
Rank	#51	Overall
	#7	Document stores

Score	1.41
Rank	#153	Overall
	#71	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

couchdb.apache.org

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.couchdb.org/en/stable

docs.heavy.ai

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

Apache top-level project, originally developed by Damien Katz, a former Lotus Notes developer

FatCloud

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2005

2012

2016

Current release

3.3.3, December 2023

5.10, January 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

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

Erlang

C++ and CUDA

Server operating systems

hosted

Android
BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Windows

Linux

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

via views

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
ColdFusion
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

View functions in JavaScript

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

improved architecture with release 2.0

Sharding

Round robin

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

selectable replication factor

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency

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

atomic operations within a single document possible

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

strategy: optimistic locking

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 can be defined per database

Can implement custom security layer via applications

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.