DBMS > Amazon Redshift vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Access

System Properties Comparison Amazon Redshift vs. Machbase Neo vs. Microsoft Access

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

TimeSeries DBMS for AIoT and BigData

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.)

Primary database model

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

Relational DBMS

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

Score	19.03
Rank	#34	Overall
	#21	Relational DBMS

Score	0.22
Rank	#324	Overall
	#29	Time Series DBMS

Score	105.40
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Website

aws.amazon.com/redshift

machbase.com

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

Technical documentation

docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift

machbase.com/dbms

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

Developer

Amazon (based on PostgreSQL)

Machbase

Microsoft

Initial release

2012

2013

1992

Current release

V8.0, August 2023

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

free test version available

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

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

Linux
macOS
Windows

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Data scheme

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.

Secondary indexes

restricted

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

does not fully support an SQL-standard

SQL-like query language

yes

but not compliant to any SQL standard

APIs and other access methods

JDBC
ODBC

gRPC
HTTP REST
JDBC
MQTT (Message Queue Telemetry Transport)
ODBC

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

Supported programming languages

All languages supporting JDBC/ODBC

C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript
PHP

via ODBC
Python
R

via ODBC
Scala

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

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

user defined functions

in Python

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

Triggers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

selectable replication factor

none

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

but no files for transaction logging

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Durability

Support for making data persistent

yes

but no files for transaction logging

In-memory capabilities

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

yes

volatile and lookup table

User concepts

Access control

fine grained access rights according to SQL-standard

simple password-based access control

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

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.