DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite vs. Transbase vs. Vitess

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Microsoft Azure SQL Database vs. SQLite vs. Transbase vs. Vitess

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

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

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

A resource-optimized, high-performance, universally applicable RDBMS

Scalable, distributed, cloud-native DBMS, extending MySQL

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Document store
Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS

Document store
Spatial DBMS

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

Score	15.25
Rank	#38	Overall
	#23	Relational DBMS

Score	72.95
Rank	#16	Overall
	#11	Relational DBMS

Score	103.35
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Score	0.05
Rank	#355	Overall
	#150	Relational DBMS

Score	0.86
Rank	#202	Overall
	#95	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.sqlite.org

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase.html

vitess.io

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

www.transaction.de/en/products/transbase/features.html

vitess.io/docs

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Transaction Software GmbH

The Linux Foundation, PlanetScale

Initial release

2012

2010

2000

1987

2013

Current release

V12

3.46.1 (13 August 2024), August 2024

Transbase 8.3, 2022

15.0.2, December 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Public Domain

commercial

free development license

Open Source

Apache Version 2.0, commercial licenses available

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++

C and C++

Server operating systems

hosted

server-less

FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Solaris
Windows

Docker
Linux
macOS

Data scheme

yes

dynamic column types

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

SQL-92 is not fully supported

yes

with proprietary extensions

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

ADO.NET
JDBC
ODBC
Proprietary native API

ADO.NET
JDBC
MySQL protocol
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

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

C
C#
C++
Java
JavaScript
Kotlin
Objective-C
PHP
Python

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

Transact SQL

yes

proprietary syntax

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

yes, with always 3 replicas available

none

Source-replica replication

Multi-source replication
Source-replica replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Eventual Consistency across shards
Immediate Consistency within a shard

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

not for MyISAM storage engine

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

yes

ACID at shard level

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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 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.