DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. HarperDB vs. Memcached vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. HarperDB vs. Memcached vs. Snowflake

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Ultra-low latency distributed database with an intuitive REST API supporting NoSQL and SQL (including joins). Deployment of functions and databases simultaneously with a consolidated node-level architecture.

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.60
Rank	#244	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Score	18.08
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.harperdb.io

www.memcached.org

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.harperdb.io/docs

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

HarperDB

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2012

2017

2003

2014

Current release

3.1, August 2021

1.6.27, May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free community edition available

Open Source

BSD 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

Node.js

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

yes

dynamic schema

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON data types

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

SQL-like data manipulation statements

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Proprietary protocol

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C#
C++
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lisp
MatLab
Objective C
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Swift

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

A table resides as a whole on one (or more) nodes in a cluster

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

yes

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

yes, using LMDB

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

Access rights for users and roles

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.