DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. Hyprcubd vs. MonetDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. Hyprcubd vs. MonetDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Hyprcubd seems to be discontinued. Therefore it is excluded from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Highly scalable cloud data warehouse and analytics product

Forked from Clickhouse

Serverless Time Series DBMS

A relational database management system that stores data in columns

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#148	Overall
	#68	Relational DBMS

Score	1.72
Rank	#135	Overall
	#62	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.firebolt.io

hyprcubd.com (offline)

www.monetdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.firebolt.io

www.monetdb.org/Documentation

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

Hyprcubd, Inc.

MonetDB BV

Initial release

2012

2020

2004

Current release

Dec2023 (11.49), December 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Mozilla Public License 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

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Solaris
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

time, int, uint, float, string

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 query language

yes

SQL 2003 with some extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (https)

JDBC
native C library

MAPI library (MonetDB application programming interface)
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes, in SQL, C, R

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Sharding via remote tables

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

depending on storage layer

none

Source-replica replication available in experimental status

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

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

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

token access

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.