DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Access vs. Ultipa

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Graph Engine vs. Microsoft Access vs. Ultipa

Please select another system to include it in the comparison.

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

A distributed in-memory data processing engine, underpinned by a strongly-typed RAM store and a general distributed computation engine

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.)

High performance Graph DBMS supporting HTAP high availability cluster deployment

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Graph DBMS
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Graph DBMS

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

Score	0.56
Rank	#241	Overall
	#21	Graph DBMS
	#34	Key-value stores

Score	93.76
Rank	#12	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	0.11
Rank	#338	Overall
	#32	Graph DBMS

Website

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

www.graphengine.io

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

www.ultipa.com

Technical documentation

www.graphengine.io/docs/manual

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

www.ultipa.com/document

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Microsoft

Ultipa

Initial release

2016

2010

1992

2019

Current release

1703

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

MIT 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

.NET and C

C++

Server operating systems

Linux

.NET

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

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

but not compliant to any SQL standard

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

RESTful HTTP API

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

RESTful HTTP API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

C#
C++
F#
Visual Basic

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

C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
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

horizontal partitioning

none

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

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

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

optional: either by committing a write-ahead log (WAL) to the local persistent storage or by dumping the memory to a persistent storage

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

User concepts

Access control

LDAP bind authentication

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.

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

Trinity
30 October 2010, microsoft.com

Open source Microsoft Graph Engine takes on Neo4j
13 February 2017, InfoWorld

Microsoft takes open source way for its Graph Engine
17 February 2017, Open Source For You

IBM releases Graph, a service that can outperform SQL databases
27 July 2016, GeekWire

Aerospike Is Now a Graph Database, Too
21 June 2023, Datanami

provided by Google News

I live with MS: Access to affordable healthcare is my lifeline | Opinion
14 August 2024, Miami Herald

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

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

Access Migration to Power Apps and Dataverse is released to General Availability
11 May 2022, Microsoft

ENGINEERING/PROJECT SOFTWARE: Program eases access to project data
16 February 2024, Offshore magazine

provided by Google News

Share this page