DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. EXASOL vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. TigerGraph

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. EXASOL vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. TigerGraph

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 Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

Widely used in-process key-value store

A complete, distributed, parallel graph computing platform supporting web-scale data analytics in real-time

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Wide column store

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Graph DBMS

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	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	2.21
Rank	#117	Overall
	#20	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	1.83
Rank	#139	Overall
	#13	Graph DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.exasol.com

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.oracle.com/database/technologies/related/berkeleydb.html

www.tigergraph.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.exasol.com/resources

docs.oracle.com/cd/E17076_05/html/index.html

docs.tigergraph.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Exasol

Microsoft

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Initial release

2012

2000

2012

1994

2017

Current release

18.1.40, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

commercial license available

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

C, Java, C++ (depending on the Berkeley DB edition)

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Linux

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

only with the Berkeley DB XML edition

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

SQL-like query language (GSQL)

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.Net
JDBC
ODBC
WebSocket

RESTful HTTP API

GSQL (TigerGraph Query Language)
Kafka
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java
Lua
Python
R

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

.Net

Figaro is a .Net framework assembly that extends Berkeley DB XML into an embeddable database engine for .NET
others

Third-party libraries to manipulate Berkeley DB files are available for many languages
C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)

3rd party binding
Perl
Python
Tcl

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

yes

Triggers

yes

only for the SQL API

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

Source-replica 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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

Relationships in graphs

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

ACID

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

Access rights for users, groups and roles according to SQL-standard

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Role-based access control

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.