DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. FatDB vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. Graph Engine vs. Graphite

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. FatDB vs. Firebase Realtime Database vs. Graph Engine vs. Graphite

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

FatDB/FatCloud has ceased operations as a company with February 2014. FatDB is discontinued and excluded from the ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A .NET NoSQL DBMS that can integrate with and extend SQL Server.

Cloud-hosted realtime document store. iOS, Android, and JavaScript clients share one Realtime Database instance and automatically receive updates with the newest data.

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

Data logging and graphing tool for time series data

The storage layer (fixed size database) is called Whisper

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

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	14.29
Rank	#39	Overall
	#6	Document stores

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	4.57
Rank	#73	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

firebase.google.com/products/realtime-database

www.graphengine.io

github.com/graphite-project/graphite-web

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

firebase.google.com/docs/database

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

graphite.readthedocs.io

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

FatCloud

Google

acquired by Google 2014

Microsoft

Chris Davis

Initial release

2012

2010

2006

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

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

.NET and C

Python

Server operating systems

hosted

Windows

hosted

.NET

Linux
Unix

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

Via inetgration in SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
LINQ
RESTful HTTP API
RPC
Windows WCF Bindings

Android
iOS
JavaScript API
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API
Sockets

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Java
JavaScript
Objective-C

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

via applications

limited functionality with using 'rules'

yes

Triggers

yes

via applications

Callbacks are triggered when data changes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

if the client is offline
Immediate Consistency

if the client is online

none

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

locking

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

yes, based on authentication and database rules

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.