DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. EXASOL vs. Hazelcast vs. IBM Db2 Event Store

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. EXASOL vs. Hazelcast vs. IBM Db2 Event Store

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

High-performance, in-memory, MPP database specifically designed for in-memory analytics.

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

Distributed Event Store optimized for Internet of Things use cases

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Event Store
Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	1.99
Rank	#124	Overall
	#58	Relational DBMS

Score	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.19
Rank	#323	Overall
	#2	Event Stores
	#28	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.exasol.com

hazelcast.com

www.ibm.com/products/db2-event-store

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.exasol.com/resources

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

www.ibm.com/docs/en/db2-event-store

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Exasol

Hazelcast

IBM

Initial release

2012

2000

2008

2017

Current release

5.3.6, November 2023

2.0

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

commercial

free developer 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

Java

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

Linux, macOS, Windows for the developer addition

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.

yes

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

SQL-like query language

yes

through the embedded Spark runtime

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
DB2 Connect
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java
Lua
Python
R

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

C
C#
C++
Cobol
Delphi
Fortran
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Visual Basic

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

yes

Triggers

yes

Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Replicated Map

Active-active shard replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Hadoop integration

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Eventual 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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

No - written data is immutable

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Yes - Synchronous writes to local disk combined with replication and asynchronous writes in parquet format to permanent shared storage

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, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

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.