TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

Amazon Redshift vs. SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    Amazon Redshift

    Score9 out of 10
    N/AAmazon Redshift is a hosted data warehouse solution, from Amazon Web Services.

    $0.24

    per GB per month

    SAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)

    Score6.9 out of 10
    N/ASAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE) is a transactional relational database, boasting fast, reliable online transaction processing (OLTP). SAP ASE is the company's transactional database within the SAP Business Technology Platform portfolio.N/A
    Pricing
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Editions & Modules
    Redshift Managed Storage
    $0.24
    per GB per month
    Current Generation
    $0.25 - $13.04
    per hour
    Previous Generation
    $0.25 - $4.08
    per hour
    Redshift Spectrum
    $5.00
    per terabyte of data scanned
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Free Trial
    NoNo
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoNo
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    NoNo
    Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Considered Both Products
    Amazon AWS
    Chose Amazon Redshift
    1. Redshift has better compression (automated) consuming less space then competitors
    2. Automated Vacuum Delete for having consistent performance
    3. AWS introduced ra3 node types for simple separation of compute and storage
    Incentivized
    SAP
    No answer on this topic
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    78%
    Would buy again
    14 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    82%
    Delivers good value for the price
    14 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    78%
    Happy with the feature set
    14 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    93%
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    14 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    100%
    Implementation went as expected
    16 Answers
    No answers on this topic
    Best Alternatives
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Small Businesses
    No answers on this topic
    SingleStore
    Score7.5 out of 10
    Medium-sized Companies
    Azure Synapse Analytics
    Score6.9 out of 10
    SAP HANA Cloud
    Score8.9 out of 10
    Enterprises
    Snowflake
    Score8.9 out of 10
    SAP IQ
    Score10 out of 10
    All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
    User Ratings
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    9.0
    (38 ratings)
    10.0
    (2 ratings)
    Likelihood to Renew
    -
    (0 ratings)
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    Usability
    9.0
    (10 ratings)
    9.0
    (1 ratings)
    Support Rating
    9.0
    (7 ratings)
    9.7
    (2 ratings)
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    10.0
    (1 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)
    User Testimonials
    Amazon RedshiftSAP Adaptive Server Enterprise (ASE)
    Likelihood to Recommend
    Amazon AWS
    If the number of connections is expected to be low, but the amounts of data are large or projected to grow it is a good solutions especially if there is previous exposure to PostgreSQL. Speaking of Postgres, Redshift is based on several versions old releases of PostgreSQL so the developers would not be able to take advantage of some of the newer SQL language features. The queries need some fine-tuning still, indexing is not provided, but playing with sorting keys becomes necessary. Lastly, there is no notion of the Primary Key in Redshift so the business must be prepared to explain why duplication occurred (must be vigilant for)
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    High-performance, high-concurrency transactions are well suited for ASE. ASE is lacking some features in my opinion such as history tables, however there are ways to implement them via workarounds or by using Replication Server. I do think the way the ASE parser and optimizer works are far superior to other products as it is a true cost-based optimizer and the order of the tables in the FROM clause does not really matter although a good SQL coder will place the tables in a meaningful order to make the SQL more readable. ASE is good for applications that require high availability and can be used for mission critical systems.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Pros
    Amazon AWS
    • [Amazon] Redshift has Distribution Keys. If you correctly define them on your tables, it improves Query performance. For instance, we can define Mapping/Meta-data tables with Distribution-All Key, so that it gets replicated across all the nodes, for fast joins and fast query results.
    • [Amazon] Redshift has Sort Keys. If you correctly define them on your tables along with above Distribution Keys, it further improves your Query performance. It also has Composite Sort Keys and Interleaved Sort Keys, to support various use cases
    • [Amazon] Redshift is forked out of PostgreSQL DB, and then AWS added "MPP" (Massively Parallel Processing) and "Column Oriented" concepts to it, to make it a powerful data store.
    • [Amazon] Redshift has "Analyze" operation that could be performed on tables, which will update the stats of the table in leader node. This is sort of a ledger about which data is stored in which node and which partition with in a node. Up to date stats improves Query performance.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    • Easy to setup and maintain
    • Reliable, rarely has major hiccups requiring reboots or crashes
    • Very responsive with complicated queries spanning various tablespaces and hundreds of millions of rows
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Cons
    Amazon AWS
    • We've experienced some problems with hanging queries on Redshift Spectrum/external tables. We've had to roll back to and old version of Redshift while we wait for AWS to provide a patch.
    • Redshift's dialect is most similar to that of PostgreSQL 8. It lacks many modern features and data types.
    • Constraints are not enforced. We must rely on other means to verify the integrity of transformed tables.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    • Full database encryption - need to utilize external keys vs internal - for better separation of duties.
    • History Tables.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Likelihood to Renew
    Amazon AWS
    No answers on this topic
    SAP
    Our licenses are perpetual. It is the support that we will be renewing. We will renew because we continue to use and receive value from the product.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Usability
    Amazon AWS
    Just very happy with the product, it fits our needs perfectly. Amazon pioneered the cloud and we have had a positive experience using RedShift. Really cool to be able to see your data housed and to be able to query and perform administrative tasks with ease.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    It does almost everything we need and for the things it doesn't do natively, we are still able to do using other features. For example, natively history tables weren't supported but we were able to create them using triggers.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Support Rating
    Amazon AWS
    The support was great and helped us in a timely fashion. We did use a lot of online forums as well, but the official documentation was an ongoing one, and it did take more time for us to look through it. We would have probably chosen a competitor product had it not been for the great support
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    Incredibly responsive, saving us countless hours in troubleshooting.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Alternatives Considered
    Amazon AWS
    Than Vertica: Redshift is cheaper and AWS integrated (which was a plus because the whole company was on AWS).
    Than BigQuery: Redshift has a standard SQL interface, though recently I heard good things about BigQuery and would try it out again.
    Than Hive: Hive is great if you are in the PB+ range, but latencies tend to be much slower than Redshift and it is not suited for ad-hoc applications.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    Much less effort than Oracle. Much better customer support than Oracle. Roughly equivalent to SQL Server in performance and ease of use. Much better customer service than SQL Server. Different ballpark from IQ. Same customer service.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    Contract Terms and Pricing Model
    Amazon AWS
    Redshift is relatively cheaper tool but since the pricing is dynamic, there is always a risk of exceeding the cost. Since most of our team is using it as self serve and there is no continuous tracking by a dedicated team, it really needs time & effort on analyst's side to know how much it is going to cost.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    No answers on this topic
    Return on Investment
    Amazon AWS
    • Our company is moving to the AWS infrastructure, and in this context moving the warehouse environments to Redshift sounds logical regardless of the cost.
    • Development organizations have to operate in the Dev/Ops mode where they build and support their apps at the same time.
    • Hard to estimate the overall ROI of moving to Redshift from my position. However, running Redshift seems to be inexpensive compared to all the licensing and hardware costs we had on our RDBMS platform before Redshift.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    SAP
    • Negative - Costs a lot ... but so do they all.
    • Positive - It does what we need it to do.
    Incentivized
    Read full review
    ScreenShots