DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Stardog vs. TempoIQ

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Stardog vs. TempoIQ

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

TempoIQ seems to be decommissioned. It will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Large scale data warehouse service for use with business intelligence tools

Enterprise Knowledge Graph platform and graph DBMS with high availability, high performance reasoning, and virtualization

Scalable analytics DBMS for sensor data, provided as a service (SaaS)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS
RDF store

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	2.02
Rank	#123	Overall
	#11	Graph DBMS
	#6	RDF stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

www.stardog.com

tempoiq.com (offline)

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

docs.stardog.com

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Stardog-Union

TempoIQ

Initial release

2012

2010

2012

Current release

7.3.0, May 2020

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

60-day fully-featured trial license; 1-year fully-featured non-commercial use license for academics/students

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

Java

Server operating systems

hosted

Linux
macOS
Windows

Data scheme

yes

schema-free and OWL/RDFS-schema support

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.

Import/export of XML data possible

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

supports real-time indexing in full-text and geospatial

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

Yes, compatible with all major SQL variants through dedicated BI/SQL Server

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

GraphQL query language
HTTP API
Jena RDF API
OWL
RDF4J API
Sesame REST HTTP Protocol
SNARL
SPARQL
Spring Data
Stardog Studio
TinkerPop 3

HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

.Net
Clojure
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Python
Ruby

C#
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
Python
Ruby

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

user defined functions and aggregates, HTTP Server extensions in Java

Triggers

yes

via event handlers

yes

Realtime Alerts

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication in HA-Cluster

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency

Immediate Consistency in HA-Cluster

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

informational only, not enforced by the system

yes

relationships in graphs

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

Access rights for users and roles

simple authentication-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.