DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Databend vs. Dgraph vs. EsgynDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Databend vs. Dgraph vs. EsgynDB vs. Google Cloud Bigtable

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

An open-source, elastic, and workload-aware cloud data warehouse designed to meet businesses' massive-scale analytics needs at low cost and with low complexity

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

Enterprise-class SQL-on-Hadoop solution, powered by Apache Trafodion

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

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Wide column store

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.30
Rank	#287	Overall
	#130	Relational DBMS

Score	1.45
Rank	#156	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	3.26
Rank	#92	Overall
	#13	Key-value stores
	#8	Wide column stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/datafuselabs/databend
www.databend.com

dgraph.io

www.esgyn.cn

cloud.google.com/bigtable

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.databend.com

dgraph.io/docs

cloud.google.com/bigtable/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Databend Labs

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Esgyn

Google

Initial release

2012

2021

2016

2015

Current release

1.0.59, April 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

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

Rust

C++, Java

Server operating systems

hosted

hosted
Linux
macOS

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

schema-free

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

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
RESTful HTTP API

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

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

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

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

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Java Stored Procedures

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

yes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Synchronous replication via Raft

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

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

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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

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

yes

ACID

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles

Planned for future releases

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.