DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. CouchDB vs. SQLite vs. Tkrzw

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. CouchDB vs. SQLite vs. Tkrzw

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

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

using the Geocouch extension

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	8.30
Rank	#47	Overall
	#7	Document stores

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#372	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

couchdb.apache.org

www.sqlite.org

dbmx.net/tkrzw

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.couchdb.org/en/stable

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Apache Software Foundation

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

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Mikio Hirabayashi

Initial release

2012

2005

2000

2020

Current release

3.3.3, December 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Erlang

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Android
BSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

server-less

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

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

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

View functions in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

improved architecture with release 2.0

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

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

Immediate 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

atomic operations within a single document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

strategy: optimistic locking

yes

via file-system locks

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

using specific database classes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users can be defined per database

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.