DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Azure AI Search vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. TerarkDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Azure AI Search vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. TerarkDB

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

Search-as-a-service for web and mobile app development

Enhanced drop-in replacement for MySQL based on XtraDB or TokuDB storage engines with improved performance and additional diagnostic and management features.

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Search engine

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Secondary database models

Vector 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	5.59
Rank	#63	Overall
	#7	Search engines

Score	2.03
Rank	#122	Overall
	#57	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/search

www.percona.com/software/mysql-database/percona-server

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

learn.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/search

www.percona.com/downloads/Percona-Server-LATEST

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Percona

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2012

2010

2015

2008

2016

Current release

8.0.36-28, 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

commercial

Open Source

GPL version 2

commercial

restricted open source version available

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++

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

.NET

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.

yes

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
ODBC

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C#
Java
JavaScript
Python

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

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication
XtraDB Cluster

none

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

yes

using Azure authentication

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.