DBMS > Memcached vs. Microsoft Access vs. OpenQM vs. Snowflake vs. Transwarp StellarDB

System Properties Comparison Memcached vs. Microsoft Access vs. OpenQM vs. Snowflake vs. Transwarp StellarDB

Editorial information provided by DB-Engines

Name

Description

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.)

QpenQM is a high-performance, self-tuning, multi-value DBMS

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

A distributed graph DBMS built for enterprise-level graph applications

Primary database model

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

Score	19.42
Rank	#32	Overall
	#4	Key-value stores

Score	104.92
Rank	#11	Overall
	#8	Relational DBMS

Score	0.27
Rank	#298	Overall
	#10	Multivalue DBMS

Score	121.33
Rank	#9	Overall
	#6	Relational DBMS

Score	0.00
Rank	#383	Overall
	#39	Graph DBMS

Website

www.memcached.org

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

www.rocketsoftware.com/products/rocket-multivalue-application-development-platform/rocket-open-qm

www.snowflake.com

www.transwarp.cn/en/product/stellardb

Technical documentation

github.com/memcached/memcached/wiki

developer.microsoft.com/en-us/access

docs.snowflake.net/manuals/index.html

Developer

Danga Interactive

originally developed by Brad Fitzpatrick for LiveJournal

Microsoft

Rocket Software, originally Martin Phillips

Snowflake Computing Inc.

Transwarp

Initial release

2003

1992

1993

2014

Current release

1.6.27, May 2024

1902 (16.0.11328.20222), March 2019

3.4-12

License

Commercial or Open Source

Open Source

BSD license

commercial

Bundled with Microsoft Office

Open Source

GPLv2, extended commercial license available

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

FreeBSD
Linux
OS X
Unix
Windows

Windows

Not a real database server, but making use of DLLs

AIX
FreeBSD
Linux
macOS
Raspberry Pi
Solaris
Windows

hosted

Data scheme

schema-free

yes

with some exceptions

yes

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

Typing

predefined data types such as float or date

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

yes

SQL-like query language

APIs and other access methods

Proprietary protocol

ADO.NET
DAO
ODBC
OLE DB

CLI Client
JDBC
ODBC

OpenCypher

Supported programming languages

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

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

.Net
Basic
C
Java
Objective C
PHP
Python

JavaScript (Node.js)
Python

Server-side scripts

Stored procedures

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

yes

user defined functions

Triggers

yes

since Access 2010 using the ACE-engine

yes

similar concept for controling cloud resources

Partitioning methods

Methods for storing different data on different nodes

none

yes

horizontal partitioning

Replication methods

Methods for redundantly storing data on multiple nodes

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

Immediate Consistency

Foreign keys

Referential integrity

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

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

Access rights can be defined down to the item level

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

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.