DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. HugeGraph vs. Infobright vs. PlanetScale

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. HugeGraph vs. Infobright vs. PlanetScale

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 fast-speed and highly-scalable Graph DBMS

High performant column-oriented DBMS for analytic workloads using MySQL or PostgreSQL as a frontend

Scalable, distributed, serverless MySQL database platform built on top of Vitess

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	0.17
Rank	#335	Overall
	#31	Graph DBMS

Score	1.02
Rank	#192	Overall
	#90	Relational DBMS

Score	1.49
Rank	#155	Overall
	#72	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/hugegraph
hugegraph.apache.org

ignitetech.com/softwarelibrary/infobrightdb

planetscale.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

hugegraph.apache.org/docs

planetscale.com/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Baidu

Ignite Technologies Inc.; formerly InfoBright Inc.

PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2018

2005

2020

Current release

0.9

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

The open source (GPLv2) version did not support inserts/updates/deletes and was discontinued with July 2016

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

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
macOS
Unix

Linux
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

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

also supports composite index and range index

Knowledge Grid Technology used instead

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
TinkerPop Gremlin

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Groovy
Java
Python

.Net
C
C#
C++
D
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Ada
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Eiffel
Erlang
Haskell
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scheme
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

asynchronous Gremlin script jobs

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

depending on used storage backend, e.g. Cassandra and HBase

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

via hugegraph-spark

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

edges in graph

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

table locks or row locks depending on storage engine

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Users, roles and permissions

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

exploiting MySQL or PostgreSQL frontend capabilities

Users with fine-grained authorization concept

no user groups or 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.