DBMS > Amazon DynamoDB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Access vs. RavenDB

System Properties Comparison Amazon DynamoDB vs. Google Cloud Datastore vs. Microsoft Access vs. RavenDB

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

Hosted, scalable database service by Amazon with the data stored in Amazons cloud

Automatically scaling NoSQL Database as a Service (DBaaS) on the Google Cloud Platform

Microsoft Access combines a backend RDBMS (JET / ACE Engine) with a GUI frontend for data manipulation and queries.

The Access frontend is often used for accessing other datasources (DBMS, Excel, etc.)

Open Source Operational and Transactional Enterprise NoSQL Document Database

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Document store

Relational DBMS

Document store

Secondary database models

Graph DBMS
Spatial DBMS
Time Series DBMS

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

Score	74.07
Rank	#17	Overall
	#3	Document stores
	#2	Key-value stores

Score	4.47
Rank	#76	Overall
	#12	Document stores

Score	104.92
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	2.92
Rank	#101	Overall
	#18	Document stores

Website

aws.amazon.com/dynamodb

cloud.google.com/datastore

www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/access

ravendb.net

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/dynamodb

cloud.google.com/datastore/docs

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

ravendb.net/docs

Developer

Amazon

Google

Microsoft

Hibernating Rhinos

Initial release

2012

2008

1992

2010

Current release

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

5.4, July 2022

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free tier for a limited amount of database operations

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

Open Source

AGPL version 3, commercial license available

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

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Windows

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

schema-free

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

yes, details here

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.

Secondary indexes

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

SQL-like query language (GQL)

yes

but not compliant to any SQL standard

SQL-like query language (RQL)

APIs and other access methods

RESTful HTTP API

gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
RESTful HTTP/JSON API

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

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

Supported programming languages

.Net
ColdFusion
Erlang
Groovy
Java
JavaScript
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

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

C
C#
C++
Delphi
Java (JDBC-ODBC)
VBA
Visual Basic.NET

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

using Google App Engine

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

yes

Triggers

yes

by integration with AWS Lambda

Callbacks using the Google Apps Engine

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Sharding

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Multi-source replication using Paxos

none

Multi-source replication

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

may be implemented via Amazon Elastic MapReduce (Amazon EMR)

yes

using Google Cloud Dataflow

yes

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Eventual Consistency
Immediate Consistency

can be specified for read operations

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on type of query and configuration

Strong Consistency is default for entity lookups and queries within an Entity Group (but can instead be made eventually consistent). Other queries are always eventual consistent.

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

via ReferenceProperties or Ancestor paths

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

ACID across one or more tables within a single AWS account and region

ACID

Serializable Isolation within Transactions, Read Committed outside of Transactions

ACID

but no files for transaction logging

ACID, Cluster-wide transaction available

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

but no files for transaction logging

yes

In-memory capabilities

Is there an option to define some or all structures to be held in-memory only.

User concepts

Access control

Access rights for users and roles can be defined via the AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM)

Access rights for users, groups and roles based on Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM)

a simple user-level security was built in till version Access 2003

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.