DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. GigaSpaces vs. PlanetScale vs. Tkrzw

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. GigaSpaces vs. PlanetScale vs. Tkrzw

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

High performance in-memory data grid platform, powering three products: Smart Cache, Smart ODS (Operational Data Store), Smart Augmented Transactions

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

A concept of libraries, allowing an application program to store and query key-value pairs in a file. Successor of Tokyo Cabinet and Kyoto Cabinet

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Values are user defined objects

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Search engine

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	1.03
Rank	#188	Overall
	#32	Document stores
	#6	Object oriented DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Score	0.07
Rank	#372	Overall
	#57	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.gigaspaces.com

planetscale.com

dbmx.net/tkrzw

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.gigaspaces.com/latest/landing.html

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Gigaspaces Technologies

PlanetScale

Mikio Hirabayashi

Initial release

2012

2000

2020

Current release

15.5, September 2020

0.9.3, August 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; Commercial licenses available

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 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

Java, C++, .Net

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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.

XML can be used for describing objects metadata

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-99 for query and DML statements

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

GigaSpaces LRMI
Hibernate
JCache
JDBC
JPA
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Spring Data

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C++
Java
Python
Scala

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

C++
Java
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes, event driven architecture

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

synchronous or asynchronous
Source-replica replication

synchronous or asynchronous

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Map-Reduce pattern can be built with XAP task executors

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable: ALL, QUORUM, ANY

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

using specific database classes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

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.