DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Linter vs. Lovefield vs. Warp 10

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. HEAVY.AI vs. Linter vs. Lovefield vs. Warp 10

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A high performance, column-oriented RDBMS, specifically developed to harness the massive parallelism of modern CPU and GPU hardware

RDBMS for high security requirements

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

TimeSeries DBMS specialized on timestamped geo data based on LevelDB or HBase

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	1.64
Rank	#145	Overall
	#67	Relational DBMS

Score	0.12
Rank	#350	Overall
	#152	Relational DBMS

Score	0.33
Rank	#286	Overall
	#131	Relational DBMS

Score	0.14
Rank	#344	Overall
	#32	Time Series DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/heavyai/heavydb
www.heavy.ai

linter.ru

google.github.io/lovefield

www.warp10.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.heavy.ai

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

www.warp10.io/content/02_Getting_started

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

HEAVY.AI, Inc.

relex.ru

Google

SenX

Initial release

2012

2016

1990

2014

2015

Current release

5.10, January 2022

2.1.12, February 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2; enterprise edition available

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Apache License 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

C++ and CUDA

C and C++

JavaScript

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux

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

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Linux
OS X
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

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
Thrift
Vega

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

HTTP API
Jupyter
WebSocket

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC/Thrift
Python

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

JavaScript

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

yes

WarpScript

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Round robin

none

Sharding

based on HBase

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

Source-replica replication

none

selectable replication factor

based on HBase

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

based on HBase

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

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

yes

using MemoryDB

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Mandatory use of cryptographic tokens, containing fine-grained authorizations

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.