DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Linter vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Linter vs. TempoIQ

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

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

RDBMS for high security requirements

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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	0.09
Rank	#346	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io

linter.ru

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

relex.ru

TempoIQ

Initial release

2012

2010

1990

2012

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

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

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

.NET

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

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

RESTful HTTP API

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

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

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

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

simple authentication-based access control

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.