DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Linter vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Riak KV

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Linter vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. Riak KV

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

RDBMS for high security requirements

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

Distributed, fault tolerant key-value store

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

with links between data sets and object tags for the creation of secondary indexes

Secondary database models

Spatial DBMS

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	19.03
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.10
Rank	#350	Overall
	#153	Relational DBMS

Score	78.40
Rank	#15	Overall
	#10	Relational DBMS

Score	4.44
Rank	#80	Overall
	#9	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

linter.ru

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

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.tiot.jp/riak-docs/riak/kv/latest

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

relex.ru

Microsoft

OpenSource, formerly Basho Technologies

Initial release

2012

1990

2010

2009

Current release

V12

3.2.0, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache version 2, commercial enterprise edition

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

C and C++

C++

Erlang

Server operating systems

hosted

AIX
Android
BSD
HP Open VMS
iOS
Linux
OS X
VxWorks
Windows

hosted

Linux
OS X

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

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

restricted

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
LINQ
ODBC
OLE DB
Oracle Call Interface (OCI)

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
C++
Java
Perl
PHP
Python
Qt
Ruby
Tcl

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

unofficial client library
C#
C++

unofficial client library
Clojure

unofficial client library
Dart

unofficial client library
Erlang
Go

unofficial client library
Groovy

unofficial client library
Haskell

unofficial client library
Java
JavaScript

unofficial client library
Lisp

unofficial client library
Perl

unofficial client library
PHP
Python
Ruby
Scala

unofficial client library
Smalltalk

unofficial client library

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

proprietary syntax with the possibility to convert from PL/SQL

Transact SQL

Erlang

Triggers

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

no "single point of failure"

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

yes, with always 3 replicas available

selectable replication factor

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

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

links between data sets can be stored

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

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

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

yes, using Riak Security

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.