DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. IBM Cloudant vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. TempoIQ

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Database as a Service offering based on Apache CouchDB

Database as a Service offering with high compatibility to Microsoft SQL Server

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	2.85
Rank	#95	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	72.95
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.ibm.com/products/cloudant

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/azure-sql/database

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

cloud.ibm.com/docs/Cloudant

docs.microsoft.com/en-us/azure/azure-sql

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

IBM, Apache Software Foundation

IBM acquired Cloudant in February 2014

Microsoft

TempoIQ

Initial release

2012

2010

2012

Current release

V12

License

Commercial or Open Source

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

Erlang

C++

Server operating systems

hosted

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C#
Java
JavaScript
Objective-C
PHP
Ruby

.Net
C#
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
PHP
Python
Ruby

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

View functions (Map-Reduce) in JavaScript

Transact SQL

Triggers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

yes, with always 3 replicas available

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency

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 operations within a document possible

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Optimistic locking

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Access rights for users can be defined per database

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

simple authentication-based access control

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.