DBMS > Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Access vs. Newts

System Properties Comparison Atos Standard Common Repository vs. Lovefield vs. Microsoft Access vs. Newts

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

Embeddable relational database for web apps written in pure JavaScript

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.)

Time Series DBMS based on Cassandra

Primary database model

Document store
Key-value store

Relational DBMS

Time Series DBMS

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

Score	0.32
Rank	#290	Overall
	#132	Relational DBMS

Score	105.40
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#396	Overall
	#42	Time Series DBMS

Website

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

google.github.io/lovefield

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

opennms.github.io/newts

Technical documentation

github.com/google/lovefield/blob/master/docs/spec_index.md

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

github.com/OpenNMS/newts/wiki

Developer

Atos Convergence Creators

Google

Microsoft

OpenNMS Group

Initial release

2016

2014

1992

2014

Current release

1703

2.1.12, February 2017

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

commercial

Open Source

Apache 2.0

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

Open Source

Apache 2.0

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

JavaScript

C++

Java

Server operating systems

Linux

server-less, requires a JavaScript environment (browser, Node.js)

tested with Chrome, Firefox, IE, Safari

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

Linux
OS X
Windows

Data scheme

Schema and schema-less with LDAP views

yes

schema-free

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

SQL-like query language

via JavaScript builder pattern

yes

but not compliant to any SQL standard

APIs and other access methods

LDAP

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

HTTP REST
Java API

Supported programming languages

All languages with LDAP bindings

JavaScript

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

Java

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

Triggers

yes

Using read-only observers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

Sharding

cell division

none

Sharding

based on Cassandra

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

yes

none

selectable replication factor

based on Cassandra

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

Eventual Consistency

based on Cassandra
Immediate Consistency

based on Cassandra

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

yes, by using IndexedDB or the cloud service Firebase Realtime Database

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

using MemoryDB

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

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

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

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

ACCDE File (What It Is and How to Open One)
27 July 2023, Lifewire

provided by Google News

Farewell, Froggy: The Age of Ribbit Is Nearing an End
25 May 2013, Mother Jones

provided by Google News

Share this page