DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenQM vs. Riak KV vs. SWC-DB

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Microsoft Azure Table Storage vs. OpenQM vs. Riak KV vs. SWC-DB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

A Wide Column Store for rapid development using massive semi-structured datasets

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

Distributed, fault tolerant key-value store

A high performance, scalable Wide Column DBMS

Primary database model

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

Wide column store

Secondary database models

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	4.48
Rank	#75	Overall
	#6	Wide column stores

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	4.10
Rank	#82	Overall
	#9	Key-value stores

Score	0.01
Rank	#376	Overall
	#13	Wide column stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/storage/tables

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

github.com/kashirin-alex/swc-db
www.swcdb.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

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

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Microsoft

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

OpenSource, formerly Basho Technologies

Alex Kashirin

Initial release

2012

1993

2009

2020

Current release

3.4-12

3.2.0, December 2022

0.5, April 2021

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

Open Source

Apache version 2, commercial enterprise edition

Open Source

GPL V3

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

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

Linux
OS X

Linux

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

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

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

RESTful HTTP API

HTTP API
Native Erlang Interface

Proprietary protocol
Thrift

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

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

C++

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Erlang

Triggers

yes

pre-commit hooks and post-commit hooks

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

Implicit feature of the cloud service

yes

Sharding

no "single point of failure"

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

implicit feature of the cloud service. Replication either local, cross-facility or geo-redundant.

yes

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

links between data sets can be stored

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

optimistic locking

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

Access rights based on private key authentication or shared access signatures

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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.