DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. SWC-DB vs. TempoIQ vs. TimescaleDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Graph Engine vs. SWC-DB vs. TempoIQ vs. TimescaleDB

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

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

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

A time series DBMS optimized for fast ingest and complex queries, based on PostgreSQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Wide column store

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.67
Rank	#232	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	0.08
Rank	#364	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Score	4.46
Rank	#71	Overall
	#5	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

tempoiq.com (offline)

www.timescale.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

docs.timescale.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Alex Kashirin

TempoIQ

Timescale

Initial release

2012

2010

2020

2012

2017

Current release

0.5, April 2021

2.15.0, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT License

Open Source

GPL V3

commercial

Open Source

Apache 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

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

.NET

Linux

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

numerics, strings, booleans, arrays, JSON blobs, geospatial dimensions, currencies, binary data, other complex data 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.

yes

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

yes

full PostgreSQL SQL syntax

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

HTTP API

ADO.NET
JDBC
native C library
ODBC
streaming API for large objects

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

C++

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Delphi
Java

JDBC
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

user defined functions, PL/pgSQL, PL/Tcl, PL/Perl, PL/Python, PL/Java, PL/PHP, PL/R, PL/Ruby, PL/Scheme, PL/Unix shell

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

Sharding

yes, across time and space (hash partitioning) attributes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication with hot standby and reads on replicas

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

fine grained access rights 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.