DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. HugeGraph vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. SQLite

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

Globally distributed, horizontally scalable, multi-model database service

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Key-value store
Wide column store

Relational 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	0.17
Rank	#335	Overall
	#31	Graph DBMS

Score	27.71
Rank	#27	Overall
	#4	Document stores
	#2	Graph DBMS
	#3	Key-value stores
	#3	Wide column stores

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

github.com/hugegraph
hugegraph.apache.org

azure.microsoft.com/services/cosmos-db

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

hugegraph.apache.org/docs

learn.microsoft.com/azure/cosmos-db

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Baidu

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2018

2014

2000

Current release

0.9

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

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

hosted

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

JSON types

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

yes

All properties auto-indexed by default

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
RESTful HTTP API
TinkerPop Gremlin

DocumentDB API
Graph API (Gremlin)
MongoDB API
RESTful HTTP API
Table API

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

Groovy
Java
Python

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript
JavaScript (Node.js)
MongoDB client drivers written for various programming languages
Python

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

asynchronous Gremlin script jobs

JavaScript

Triggers

JavaScript

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

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

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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

yes

Implicit feature of the cloud service

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

via hugegraph-spark

with Hadoop integration

Integration with Hadoop/HDInsight on Azure*

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

Bounded Staleness
Consistent Prefix
Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

Consistency level configurable on request level
Session Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

edges in graph

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

Multi-item ACID transactions with snapshot isolation within a partition

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.