DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. EsgynDB vs. H2GIS vs. HarperDB vs. Kinetica

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. EsgynDB vs. H2GIS vs. HarperDB vs. Kinetica

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

Spatial extension of H2

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

Fully vectorized database across both GPUs and CPUs

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.16
Rank	#329	Overall
	#146	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#7	Spatial DBMS

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	0.64
Rank	#236	Overall
	#109	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.h2gis.org/docs/home

docs.harperdb.io/docs

docs.kinetica.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Esgyn

CNRS

HarperDB

Kinetica

Initial release

2012

2015

2013

2017

2012

Current release

3.1, August 2021

7.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

LGPL 3.0

commercial

free community edition 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

Java

Node.js

C, C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

yes

dynamic schema

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/ADO.Net

Java

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Java Stored Procedures

yes

based on H2

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

triggers when inserted values for one or more columns fall within a specified range

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication between multi datacenters

yes

based on H2

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

Source-replica replication

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 or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

GPU vRAM or System RAM

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes

based on H2

Access rights for users and roles

Access rights for users and roles on table level

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.