DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. etcd vs. Hazelcast vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. etcd vs. Hazelcast vs. Percona Server for MongoDB

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

A distributed reliable key-value store

A widely adopted in-memory data grid

A drop-in replacement for MongoDB Community Edition with enterprise-grade features.

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Document store

Secondary database models

Document store

JSON support with IMDG 3.12

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	5.97
Rank	#57	Overall
	#6	Key-value stores

Score	0.52
Rank	#254	Overall
	#39	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

hazelcast.com

www.percona.com/mongodb/software/percona-server-for-mongodb

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

hazelcast.org/imdg/docs

docs.percona.com/percona-distribution-for-mongodb

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Hazelcast

Percona

Initial release

2012

2008

2015

Current release

3.4, August 2019

5.3.6, November 2023

3.4.10-2.10, November 2017

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

Open Source

Apache Version 2; commercial licenses available

Open Source

GPL Version 2

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

Java

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

FreeBSD
Linux
Windows

experimental

All OS with a Java VM

Linux

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

the object must implement a serialization strategy

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

gRPC
JSON over HTTP

JCache
JPA
Memcached protocol
RESTful HTTP API

proprietary protocol using JSON

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++
Clojure
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Python
Scala

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Clojure
ColdFusion
D
Dart
Delphi
Erlang
Go
Groovy
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Perl
PHP
PowerShell
Prolog
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Smalltalk

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Event Listeners, Executor Services

JavaScript

Triggers

yes, watching key changes

yes

Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

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

Replicated Map

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency selectable by user

Raft Consensus Algorithm

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

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

one or two-phase-commit; repeatable reads; read commited

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

via In-Memory Engine

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control

Access rights for users and roles

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.