We performed a comparison between CockroachDB and MariaDB based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Relational Databases Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
"The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"I use CockroachDB to test big data samples and to create the best structure for databases. We have four users and required 10 people for deployment and maintenance."
"The best feature of CockroachDB is the ability to keep the nodes in different locations."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"The most valuable feature is that it uses multiple cores, which is better than some of the other databases."
"There is the need for a robust IDE for MongoDB. The existing PHP admin console doesn't meet the client's requirements effectively."
"MariaDB has a straightforward initial setup with easy-to-understand documentation."
"MariaDB is scalable."
"The performance is very good."
"From the user's perspective, the performance of the columnar queries is very good in terms of the database when comparing it to the Oracle, and MySQL."
"Installation is straightforward."
"The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it is a cloud-based tool, so it is pretty fast."
"The initial setup and pricing could be improved."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"The product must improve its disaster recovery features."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"The maintenance and performance could be a bit better."
"In future releases, mainly the addition of security features would be beneficial for MariaDB."
"The license should be cheaper and closer to that offered by MySQL, Oracle and other products."
"MariaDB's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"I'd like to see improved materialized views, like the ability to save select queries. This feature is missing in MariaDB compared to other relational databases like Oracle and SQL Server."
"The price could be less expensive."
"MariaDB should provide HA and archive logging... I haven't had the opportunity to use the features provided by the solution since I don't know how to see them."
"The scaling for database online transactions needs improvement."
CockroachDB is ranked 9th in Relational Databases Tools with 10 reviews while MariaDB is ranked 5th in Relational Databases Tools with 51 reviews. CockroachDB is rated 8.0, while MariaDB is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CockroachDB writes "Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MariaDB writes "Simultaneously use active server capabilities but lacks the maturity ". CockroachDB is most compared with Oracle Database, MySQL, Citus Data, Amazon Aurora and SingleStore, whereas MariaDB is most compared with SQL Server, Oracle Database, PostgreSQL, Firebird SQL and IBM Db2 Database. See our CockroachDB vs. MariaDB report.
See our list of best Relational Databases Tools vendors.
We monitor all Relational Databases Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
