DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Cachelot.io vs. LeanXcale vs. Microsoft Access vs. SpaceTime

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Cachelot.io vs. LeanXcale vs. Microsoft Access vs. SpaceTime

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

This system has been discontinued and will be removed from the DB-Engines ranking.

Description

Highly scalable database system, designed for managing session and subscriber data in modern mobile communication networks

In-memory caching system

A highly scalable full ACID SQL database with fast NoSQL data ingestion and GIS capabilities

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.)

SpaceTime is a spatio-temporal DBMS with a focus on performance.

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Key-value store

Key-value store
Relational DBMS

Relational DBMS

Spatial DBMS

Secondary database models

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.04
Rank	#388	Overall
	#62	Key-value stores

Score	0.36
Rank	#280	Overall
	#40	Key-value stores
	#129	Relational DBMS

Score	101.16
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	0.03
Rank	#392	Overall
	#8	Spatial DBMS

Website

atos.net/en/convergence-creators/portfolio/standard-common-repository

cachelot.io

www.leanxcale.com

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

www.mireo.com/spacetime

Technical documentation

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

LeanXcale

Microsoft

Mireo

Initial release

2016

2015

1992

2020

Current release

1703

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Simplified BSD License

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

commercial

Cloud-based only

Only available as a cloud service

DBaaS offerings (sponsored links)

Database as a Service

Providers of DBaaS offerings, please contact us to be listed.

Implementation language

Java

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Linux

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

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

yes

SQL

Support of SQL

yes

through Apache Derby

yes

but not compliant to any SQL standard

A subset of ANSI SQL is implemented

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

Memcached protocol

JDBC
Kafka Connector
ODBC
proprietary key/value interface
Spark Connector

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

.Net
C
C++
ColdFusion
Erlang
Java
Lisp
Lua
OCaml
OCaml
Perl
PHP
Python
Ruby

C
Java
Scala

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

C#
C++
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

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

cell division

none

Fixed-grid hypercubes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

Real-time block device replication (DRBD)

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Immediate Consistency or Eventual Consistency depending on configuration

none

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

yes

Transaction concepts

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

Atomic execution of specific operations

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

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

LDAP bind authentication

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

yes

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.

Related products and services

We invite representatives of vendors of related products to contact us for presenting information about their offerings here.

More resources

DB-Engines blog posts

MS Access drops in DB-Engines Ranking
2 May 2013, Paul Andlinger

Microsoft SQL Server regained rank 2 in the DB-Engines popularity ranking
3 December 2012, Matthias Gelbmann

New DB-Engines Ranking shows the popularity of database management systems
3 October 2012, Matthias Gelbmann, Paul Andlinger

show all

Recent citations in the news

Abusing Microsoft Access "Linked Table" Feature to Perform NTLM Forced Authentication Attacks - Check Point Research
9 November 2023, Check Point Research

Hackers Exploit Microsoft Access Feature to Steal Windows User’s NTLM Tokens
11 November 2023, CybersecurityNews

After installing Navisworks, Office 2016 (32-bit) applications stopped launching
8 October 2023, Autodesk Redshift

How to Connect MS Access to MySQL via ODBC Driver
7 September 2023, TechiExpert.com

MS access program to increase awareness and independence of those living with MS and disability
10 July 2023, Nebraska Medicine

provided by Google News

Share this page