DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Splice Machine vs. TerarkDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. Percona Server for MySQL vs. Splice Machine 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

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

Open-Source SQL RDBMS for Operational and Analytical use cases with native Machine Learning, powered by Hadoop and Spark

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

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

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	2.03
Rank	#122	Overall
	#57	Relational DBMS

Score	0.54
Rank	#250	Overall
	#114	Relational DBMS

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

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io

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

splicemachine.com

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

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

splicemachine.com/how-it-works

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Percona

Splice Machine

ByteDance, originally Terark

Initial release

2012

2010

2008

2014

2016

Current release

8.0.36-28, 2024

3.1, March 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL version 2

Open Source

AGPL 3.0, commercial license available

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++

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

.NET

Linux

Linux
OS X
Solaris
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.

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

JDBC
Native Spark Datasource
ODBC

C++ API
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

C#
C++
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
R
Scala

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Java

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Shared Nothhing Auto-Sharding, Columnar Partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication
XtraDB Cluster

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Yes, via Full Spark Integration

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

yes, multi-version concurrency control (MVCC)

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or roles

Access rights for users, groups and roles 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.