DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. RocksDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Firebolt vs. RocksDB

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

Embeddable persistent key-value store optimized for fast storage (flash and RAM)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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	3.65
Rank	#85	Overall
	#11	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.firebolt.io

rocksdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.firebolt.io

github.com/facebook/rocksdb/wiki

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Firebolt Analytics Inc.

Facebook, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2020

2013

Current release

9.2.1, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

BSD

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++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.Net
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C
C++
Go
Java
Perl
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Triggers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

depending on storage layer

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

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

yes

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

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.