DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Snowflake vs. TerarkDB vs. Yaacomo

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Snowflake vs. TerarkDB vs. Yaacomo

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Yaacomo seems to be discontinued and is removed from the DB-Engines ranking

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

A key-value store forked from RocksDB with advanced compression algorithms. It can be used standalone or as a storage engine for MySQL and MongoDB

OpenCL based in-memory RDBMS, designed for efficiently utilizing the hardware via parallel computing

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	17.94
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#60	Key-value stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.snowflake.com

github.com/bytedance/terarkdb

yaacomo.com

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

bytedance.larkoffice.com/docs/doccnZmYFqHBm06BbvYgjsHHcKc

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Snowflake Computing Inc.

ByteDance, originally Terark

Q2WEB GmbH

Initial release

2012

2014

2016

2009

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

restricted open source version available

commercial

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

Android
Linux
Windows

Data scheme

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

schema-free

yes

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

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

C++ API
Java API

JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

C++
Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions

Triggers

similar concept for controling cloud resources

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

yes

none

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

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

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

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

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.