DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. RavenDB vs. Spark SQL vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. RavenDB vs. Spark SQL vs. SQLite

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

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Spark SQL is a component on top of 'Spark Core' for structured data processing

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Document store

Relational DBMS

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	16.88
Rank	#35	Overall
	#22	Relational DBMS

Score	2.84
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Score	18.04
Rank	#33	Overall
	#20	Relational DBMS

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

ravendb.net

spark.apache.org/sql

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

ravendb.net/docs

spark.apache.org/docs/latest/sql-programming-guide.html

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Hibernating Rhinos

Apache Software Foundation

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2012

2010

2014

2000

Current release

5.4, July 2022

3.5.0 ( 2.13), September 2023

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Scala

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Linux
OS X
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

yes

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language (RQL)

SQL-like DML and DDL statements

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

.NET Client API
F# Client API
Go Client API
Java Client API
NodeJS Client API
PHP Client API
Python Client API
RESTful HTTP API

JDBC
ODBC

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

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

Java
Python
R
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

Triggers

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes, utilizing Spark Core

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication

none

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Default ACID transactions on the local node (eventually consistent across the cluster). Atomic operations with cluster-wide ACID transactions. Eventual consistency for indexes and full-text search indexes.

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

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

Authorization levels configured per client per database

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.