DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. FatDB vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. Spark SQL

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. FatDB vs. Oracle Berkeley DB vs. Spark SQL

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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.

Widely used in-process key-value store

Spark SQL is a component on top of 'Spark Core' for structured data processing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

supports sorted and unsorted key sets
Native XML DBMS

in the Oracle Berkeley DB XML version

Relational DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	2.01
Rank	#126	Overall
	#21	Key-value stores
	#3	Native XML DBMS

Score	18.04
Rank	#33	Overall
	#20	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

spark.apache.org/sql

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

spark.apache.org/docs/latest/sql-programming-guide.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

FatCloud

Oracle

originally developed by Sleepycat, which was acquired by Oracle

Apache Software Foundation

Initial release

2012

1994

2014

Current release

18.1.40, May 2020

3.5.0 ( 2.13), September 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

commercial license 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

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

Scala

Server operating systems

hosted

Windows

AIX
Android
FreeBSD
iOS
Linux
OS X
Solaris
VxWorks
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

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

Via inetgration in SQL Server

yes

SQL interfaced based on SQLite is available

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

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

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.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

Java
Python
R
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

via applications

Triggers

yes

via applications

yes

only for the SQL API

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

yes, utilizing Spark Core

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

Source-replica replication

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

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

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

Can implement custom security layer via applications

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.