DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Databend vs. Faircom EDGE vs. STSdb

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Databend vs. Faircom EDGE vs. STSdb

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

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

FairCom EDGE is an Industry 4.0 solution built to integrate, collect, aggregate and synchronize mission-critical data in edge computing environments

Key-Value Store with special method for indexing

optimized for high performance using a special indexing method

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Key-value 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	0.02
Rank	#368	Overall
	#54	Key-value stores
	#156	Relational DBMS

Score	0.04
Rank	#360	Overall
	#52	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.faircom.com/products/faircom-edge

github.com/STSSoft/STSdb4

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.databend.com

docs.faircom.com/docs/en/UUID-23d4f1fd-d213-f6d5-b92e-9b7475baa14e.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Databend Labs

FairCom Corporation

STS Soft SC

Initial release

2012

2021

1979

2011

Current release

1.0.59, April 2023

V3, October 2020

4.0.8, September 2015

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Restricted, free version available

Open Source

GPLv2, commercial license 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

Rust

ANSI C, C++

Server operating systems

hosted

hosted
Linux
macOS

Android
Linux

ARM, x86
Raspbian
Windows

Windows

Data scheme

yes

Flexible Schema (defined schema, partial schema, schema free)

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, ANSI Standard SQL Types

yes

primitive types and user defined types (classes)

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

ANSI SQL queries

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
Direct SQL
IoT Microservice layer
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

.NET Client API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Rust

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
PHP
Python
VB.Net

C#
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

.Net, JavaScript, C/C++

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

File partitioning

Customizable business rules for partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

Synchronous and asynchronous realtime replication based on transaction logs

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency
Tunable Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

when using SQL

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

across SQL and NoSQL

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

Fine grained user, group and file access rights managed across SQL (per ANSI standard) and NoSQL.

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.