DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. Microsoft Access vs. Realm vs. SQLite

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Dgraph vs. Microsoft Access vs. Realm vs. SQLite

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

Distributed and scalable native Graph DBMS

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.)

A DBMS built for use on mobile devices that’s a fast, easy to use alternative to SQLite and Core Data

Widely used embeddable, in-process RDBMS

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

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

Score	1.53
Rank	#152	Overall
	#15	Graph DBMS

Score	101.16
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	7.41
Rank	#52	Overall
	#8	Document stores

Score	111.41
Rank	#10	Overall
	#7	Relational DBMS

Website

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

dgraph.io

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

realm.io

www.sqlite.org

Technical documentation

dgraph.io/docs

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

realm.io/docs

www.sqlite.org/docs.html

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Dgraph Labs, Inc.

Microsoft

Realm, acquired by MongoDB in May 2019

Dwayne Richard Hipp

Initial release

2016

1992

2014

2000

Current release

1703

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

3.46.0 (23 May 2024), May 2024

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

Open Source

Public Domain

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

Linux
OS X
Windows

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Android
Backend: server-less
iOS
Windows

server-less

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

schema-free

yes

dynamic column types

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

optional

yes

not rigid because of 'dynamic typing' concept.

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

but not compliant to any SQL standard

yes

SQL-92 is not fully supported

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

GraphQL query language
gRPC (using protocol buffers) API
HTTP API

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

ADO.NET

inofficial driver
JDBC

inofficial driver
ODBC

inofficial driver

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

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

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

.Net
Java

with Android only
Objective-C
React Native
Swift

Actionscript
Ada
Basic
C
C#
C++
D
Delphi
Forth
Fortran
Haskell
Java
JavaScript
Lisp
Lua
MatLab
Objective-C
OCaml
Perl
PHP
PL/SQL
Python
R
Ruby
Scala
Scheme
Smalltalk
Tcl

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

runs within the applications so server-side scripts are unnecessary

Triggers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

yes

Change Listeners

yes

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

yes

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

Synchronous replication via Raft

none

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

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

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

via file-system locks

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

In-Memory realm

yes

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

Planned for future releases

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.