DBMS > EJDB vs. FoundationDB vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Access vs. Snowflake

System Properties Comparison EJDB vs. FoundationDB vs. Memcached vs. Microsoft Access vs. Snowflake

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Created as commercial project in 2013, FoundationDB has been acquired by Apple in March 2015 and was withdrawn from the market. As a consequence, the product was removed from the DB-Engines ranking. In April 2018, Apple open-sourced FoundationDB and it therefore reappears in the ranking.

Description

Embeddable document-store database library with JSON representation of queries (in MongoDB style)

Ordered key-value store. Core features are complimented by layers.

In-memory key-value store, originally intended for caching

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.)

Cloud-based data warehousing service for structured and semi-structured data

Primary database model

Document store

supported via specific layer
Key-value store
Relational DBMS

supported via specific SQL-layer

Key-value store

Relational DBMS

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

Score	0.31
Rank	#296	Overall
	#44	Document stores

Score	1.06
Rank	#185	Overall
	#31	Document stores
	#28	Key-value stores
	#85	Relational DBMS

Score	18.08
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	101.16
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	130.36
Rank	#8	Overall
	#5	Relational DBMS

Website

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb

github.com/apple/foundationdb

www.memcached.org

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

www.snowflake.com

Technical documentation

github.com/Softmotions/ejdb/blob/master/README.md

apple.github.io/foundationdb

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Softmotions

FoundationDB

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Initial release

2012

2013

2003

1992

2014

Current release

6.2.28, November 2020

1.6.27, May 2024

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

GPLv2

Open Source

Apache 2.0

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

commercial

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

server-less

Linux
OS X
Windows

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

some layers support schemas

schema-free

yes

support of semi-structured data formats (JSON, XML, Avro)

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

yes

string, integer, double, bool, date, object_id

some layers support typing

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

supported in specific SQL layer only

yes

but not compliant to any SQL standard

yes

APIs and other access methods

in-process shared library

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

Supported programming languages

Actionscript
C
C#
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript (Node.js)
Lua
Objective-C
Pike
Python
Ruby

.Net
C
C++
Go
Java
JavaScript

Node.js
PHP
Python
Ruby
Swift

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

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

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

in SQL-layer only

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

Sharding

none

yes

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

none

yes

none

Repcached, a Memcached patch, provides this functionallity

none

yes

MapReduce

Offers an API for user-defined Map/Reduce methods

Consistency concepts

Methods to ensure consistency in a distributed system

Linearizable consistency

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

typically not needed, however similar functionality with collection joins possible

in SQL-layer only

yes

Transaction concepts

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

ACID

but no files for transaction logging

ACID

Concurrency

Support for concurrent manipulation of data

yes

Read/Write Locking

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.

User concepts

Access control

yes

using SASL (Simple Authentication and Security Layer) protocol

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

Users with fine-grained authorization concept, user roles and pluggable authentication

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.