DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. MarkLogic vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. MarkLogic vs. OrigoDB vs. Sequoiadb

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

Operational and transactional Enterprise NoSQL database

A fully ACID in-memory object graph database

NewSQL database with distributed OLTP and SQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store
Native XML DBMS
RDF store

as of version 7
Search engine

Document store
Object oriented DBMS

Document store
Relational DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	5.18
Rank	#63	Overall
	#11	Document stores
	#1	Native XML DBMS
	#1	RDF stores
	#7	Search engines

Score	0.06
Rank	#380	Overall
	#50	Document stores
	#18	Object oriented DBMS

Score	0.50
Rank	#258	Overall
	#41	Document stores
	#120	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.progress.com/marklogic

origodb.com

www.sequoiadb.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.progress.com/marklogic/documentation

origodb.com/docs

www.sequoiadb.com/en/index.php?m=Files&a=index

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

MarkLogic Corp.

Robert Friberg et al

Sequoiadb Ltd.

Initial release

2012

2001

2009

under the name LiveDB

2013

Current release

11.0, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted free version is available

Open Source

Server: AGPL; Client: Apache V2

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++

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
OS X
Windows

Linux
Windows

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

Schema can be enforced

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

User defined using .NET types and collections

yes

oid, date, timestamp, binary, regex

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

can be achieved using .NET

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

SQL92

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

Java API
Node.js Client API
ODBC
proprietary Optic API

Proprietary Query API, introduced with version 9
RESTful HTTP API
SPARQL
WebDAV
XDBC
XQuery
XSLT

.NET Client API
HTTP API
LINQ

proprietary protocol using JSON

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

.Net

.Net
C++
Java
PHP
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

via XQuery or JavaScript

yes

JavaScript

Triggers

yes

Domain Events

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

horizontal partitioning

client side managed; servers are not synchronized

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

via Hadoop Connector, HDFS Direct Access and in-database MapReduce jobs

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

depending on model

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

can act as a resource manager in an XA/JTA transaction

ACID

Document is locked during a transaction

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

Write ahead log

yes

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

yes, with Range Indexes

yes

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

Role-based access control at the document and subdocument levels

Role based authorization

simple password-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.