DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Galaxybase vs. Graph Engine vs. Infobright vs. Linter

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Galaxybase vs. Graph Engine vs. Infobright vs. Linter

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Scalable, ACID-compliant native distributed parallel graph platform

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

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

RDBMS for high security requirements

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#385	Overall
	#40	Graph DBMS

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.88
Rank	#198	Overall
	#92	Relational DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#368	Overall
	#156	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

galaxybase.com

www.graphengine.io

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

linter.ru

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Chuanglin(Createlink) Technology Co., Ltd 浙江创邻科技有限公司

Microsoft

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

relex.ru

Initial release

2012

2017

2010

2005

1990

Current release

Nov 20, November 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

commercial

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 and Java

.NET and C

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

.NET

Linux
Windows

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

Data scheme

yes

Strong typed schema

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

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Browser interface
console (shell)
Graph API (Gremlin)
OpenCypher
Proprietary native API

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Go
Java
Python

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined procedures and functions

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

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

Source-replica replication

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

yes

Relationships in graphs

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

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

Role-based access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

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.