DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. Sqrrl

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. etcd vs. HarperDB vs. Sqrrl

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Sqrrl has been acquired by Amazon and became a part of Amazon Web Services. It has been removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A distributed reliable key-value store

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.

Adaptable, secure NoSQL built on Apache Accumulo

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Document store

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	7.25
Rank	#54	Overall
	#5	Key-value stores

Score	0.55
Rank	#248	Overall
	#38	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

etcd.io
github.com/etcd-io/etcd

www.harperdb.io

sqrrl.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

etcd.io/docs
github.com/etcd-io/etcd/tree/master/Documentation

docs.harperdb.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

HarperDB

Amazon

originally Sqrrl Data, Inc.

Initial release

2012

2017

2012

Current release

3.4, August 2019

3.1, August 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

free community edition available

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

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

dynamic schema

schema-free

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like data manipulation statements

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JDBC
ODBC
React Hooks
RESTful HTTP/JSON API
WebSocket

Accumulo Shell
Java API
JDBC
ODBC
RESTful HTTP API
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
C
C++
Clojure
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Perl
PHP
Python
R
Ruby
Rust
Scala
Tcl

.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

Actionscript
C

using GLib
C#
C++
Cocoa
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

Custom Functions

since release 3.1

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

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

Sharding

making use of Hadoop

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Using Raft consensus algorithm to ensure data replication with strong consistency among multiple replicas.

yes

the nodes on which a table resides can be defined

selectable replication factor

making use of Hadoop

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Document store kept consistent with combination of global timestamping, row-level transactions, and server-side consistency resolution.

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

Transaction concepts

Support to ensure data integrity after non-atomic manipulations of data

ACID

Atomic execution of specific operations

Atomic updates per row, document, or graph entity

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

Cell-level Security, Data-Centric Security, Role-Based Access Control (RBAC), Attribute-Based Access Control (ABAC)

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.