DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Datomic vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Datomic vs. MySQL vs. Prometheus

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

Datomic builds on immutable values, supports point-in-time queries and uses 3rd party systems for durability

Widely used open source RDBMS

Open-source Time Series DBMS and monitoring system

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key/Value like access via memcached API

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	1.55
Rank	#144	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	1029.49
Rank	#2	Overall
	#2	Relational DBMS

Score	7.56
Rank	#49	Overall
	#3	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.datomic.com

www.mysql.com

prometheus.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.datomic.com

dev.mysql.com/doc

prometheus.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Cognitect

Oracle

since 2010, originally MySQL AB, then Sun

Initial release

2012

1995

2015

Current release

1.0.7180, July 2024

9.0.0, July 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

limited edition free

Open Source

GPL version 2. Commercial licenses with extended functionallity are available

Open Source

Apache 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

Java, Clojure

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

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

Import of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Clojure
Java

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Transaction Functions

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

By using transaction functions

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

horizontal partitioning, sharding with MySQL Cluster or MySQL Fabric

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

But extensive use of caching in the application peers

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes

by Federation

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

not for MyISAM storage engine

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

using external storage systems (e.g. Cassandra, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Couchbase and others)

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

recommended only for testing and development

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.