DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. IBM Cloudant vs. JaguarDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Highly scalable cloud data warehouse and analytics product

Forked from Clickhouse

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Performant, highly scalable DBMS for AI and IoT applications

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Key-value store
Vector DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	1.90
Rank	#134	Overall
	#62	Relational DBMS

Score	2.68
Rank	#106	Overall
	#20	Document stores

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores
	#13	Vector DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.firebolt.io

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

www.jaguardb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.firebolt.io

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

www.jaguardb.com/support.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

DataJaguar, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2020

2010

2015

Current release

3.3 July 2023

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPL V3.0

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

Erlang

C++

the server part. Clients available in other languages

Server operating systems

hosted

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

but no views, foreign keys, triggers

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

depending on storage layer

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication

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

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

atomic operations within a document possible

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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 can be defined per database

rights management via user accounts

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.