DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Graphite vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Graphite vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB

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

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

Data logging and graphing tool for time series data

The storage layer (fixed size database) is called Whisper

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Time Series DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.61
Rank	#240	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#35	Key-value stores

Score	4.57
Rank	#73	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Score	29.04
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io

github.com/graphite-project/graphite-web

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

graphite.readthedocs.io

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Chris Davis

Microsoft

Initial release

2012

2010

2006

2014

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

.NET and C

Python

Server operating systems

hosted

.NET

Linux
Unix

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

Numeric data only

yes

JSON types

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

All properties auto-indexed by default

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API
Sockets

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

JavaScript

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

none

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

none

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session 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

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

locking

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.