Google Cloud Firestore vs ScyllaDB comparison

Read 12 ScyllaDB reviews

2,327 Views
1,404 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Google Cloud Firestore

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 7, 2025

ScyllaDB and Google Cloud Firestore are competitive in the NoSQL database category, each catering to specific user needs. ScyllaDB is known for performance, featuring low latency and high throughput, while Firestore is noted for its integration with the Google Cloud ecosystem and scalability.

Features: ScyllaDB provides a distributed NoSQL database architecture, ideal for high-speed transaction applications, and offers compatibility with Cassandra workloads for seamless migrations. It supports real-time data processing efficiently. Google Cloud Firestore offers integration within the Google ecosystem providing real-time data synchronization, offline capabilities, and a serverless architecture beneficial for web and mobile app development.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: ScyllaDB deployment often requires a manual setup that suits organizations with technical expertise. Google Cloud Firestore simplifies deployment with a serverless framework eliminating infrastructure management. ScyllaDB might offer tailored support options while Firestore benefits from Google's extensive customer service network, making ongoing maintenance simpler.

Pricing and ROI: ScyllaDB offers flexible deployment options which can optimize costs if managed efficiently, though initial setup costs might be high. Google Cloud Firestore's pay-as-you-go pricing model makes budgeting predictable and scales with demand, facilitating broad application deployment and predictable expenses. Firestore's pricing supports various break-even scales in application deployment.

To learn more, read our detailed Google Cloud Firestore vs. ScyllaDB Report (Updated: April 2025).

Google Cloud Firestore vs. ScyllaDB

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Google Cloud Firestore

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

13th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

8.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed NoSQL Databases (10th)

ScyllaDB

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

AnthonyAbah

Assistant Director at NAFDAC

Real-time syncing boosts productivity with efficient data management

The most valuable features are Firestore's query capabilities and its real-time syncing functionality. The queries are efficient, apart from some limitations. Real-time syncing allows any changes at the backend to automatically appear at the frontend. This is highly useful as it eliminates the need to reload the browser to see the updates.

Read full review

ArpitShah

Software Analyst at CLSA

Self-hosting complexity and the way ScyllaDB counts operations can be confusing and may not reflect actual usage

It seems we have better options available. So probably don't go for ScyllaDB. The reason is, first, it's very high. It's not as straightforward as, like, Postgres or ClickHouse to set up. It requires a complex setup. The other problem is what they call. For example, they will say that for up to a million operations, you experience this. But the problem is if they have nine servers, then your one operation is counted as nine operations, not one. So, even though you have one write, they count it as nine. It's like it's just not false premises. You can always host it yourself, but then it's way more complex. The benefits are not substantially more than those of other databases. It's not that it's slow or anything. It's good enough and all. But it's just that ClickHouse or other databases are simpler and faster and probably provide more features. So, I kind of burn out from the database, and that's why I would keep it small.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"The most valuable features are Firestore's query capabilities and its real-time syncing functionality."

"I use the solution for maps, saving some locations, and chats."

"ScyllaDB is fast and reliable. It has good performance."

"The database is easy to use, fast, and accessible for applications because the API is straightforward."

"Firstly, if I update something, it's most likely to finish within milliseconds."

"The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively."

"I like how fast it is to query data from the ScyllaDB node!"

"It is lightweight, and it requires less infrastructure."

"The documentation is good. It integrates easily with our existing data infrastructure."

"The best features of ScyllaDB are how it synchronizes data and its failover system. There's a unique formula to decide the number of nodes you need and the minimum required, which I find helpful. It also offers encryption and supports APIs, making it great for distributed systems and scaling databases across different regions. While it's easy to use, having prior experience helps configure it properly. There are many configurations; if you don't understand them, you might mess up the design. So, understanding your system's needs, like whether it requires more read or write operations, is crucial for setting up the correct configuration."

More ScyllaDB pros

Cons

"I initially faced a problem creating groups in individual chats."

"Firestore needs improvements in its querying capabilities, particularly the ability to join tables and merge data from different tables before sending it to the front end."

"The documentation is not well established for new developers."

"If you don't have the best computing resources, then it's not easy to set up. In such cases, we have to run ScyllaDB in developer mode."

"From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction."

"Data export, along with how we can purchase the data periodically, needs to be improved so that the storage is within control. Then, we could optimize it even better."

"We faced several challenges while integrating ScyllaDB into our AWS environment. One common issue was that a security port wasn’t opened on one node, preventingdata synchronization across clusters. We noticed the data wasn’t syncing correctly when we saw different record counts in other regions. After investigating, we found that the port was closed in one AWS region. Once we opened the port, the data synchronization across all nodes resumed as expected."

"It seems we have better options available. So probably don't go for ScyllaDB. The reason is, first, it's very high. It's not as straightforward as, like, Postgres or ClickHouse to set up. It requires a complex setup."

"Some of the regular commands in NoSQL do not work."

"The documentation of Scylla is an area with shortcomings and needs to be improved."

More ScyllaDB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It is an expensive tool compared to its competitor."

"I believe that there is a yearly licensing cost and that it's expensive."

"It's free."

"It's a bit expensive."

"The paid version of ScyllaDB is not that expensive. The main advantage of the paid version is direct support from the ScyllaDB team, which can resolve issues faster—typically within a day, compared to two to three days with the free version. The paid version also offers better guidance and support, while the free version has good documentation and is more high-level. I’d rate their support team nine out of ten because of the quick responses from their community."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Comms Service Provider

Hospitality Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Google Cloud Firestore?

Firestore needs improvements in its querying capabilities, particularly the ability to join tables and merge data from different tables before sending it to the front end. The pricing model is also...

What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Firestore?

I use Google Cloud Firestore for user management and data storage, primarily for web applications. Firestore helps sync data between different users and stores documents efficiently.

What advice do you have for others considering Google Cloud Firestore?

I highly recommend Google Cloud Firestore due to its cost-effectiveness and real-time syncing capabilities. However, it needs improvements in querying functionalities and a simplified pricing model.

What do you like most about Scylla?

The performance aspects of Scylla are good, as always... A good point about Scylla is that it can be used extensively.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Scylla?

The enterprise version comes with a cost of about $300,000 per year, however, we did not experience the promised compaction benefits.

What needs improvement with Scylla?

From a sales pitch standpoint, it needs to deliver on promises of better ROI and compaction. Additionally, ticketing and support systems could be improved due to the time it takes to get answers. T...

More ScyllaDB Competitors

Comparisons

No data available

Couchbase vs ScyllaDB

Compared 18% of the time

Redis vs ScyllaDB

Compared 13% of the time

Cassandra vs ScyllaDB

Compared 12% of the time

Apache HBase vs ScyllaDB

Compared 11% of the time

InfluxDB vs ScyllaDB

Compared 11% of the time

Product Reports

Download Google Cloud Firestore product report

NoSQL Databases

March 2025

Download ScyllaDB product report

April 2025

Overview

Google Cloud Firestore is a scalable, real-time NoSQL cloud database that provides document-oriented data storage and synchronizes data seamlessly across devices.

Designed for mobile, web, and server development, Firestore allows developers to store and sync data quickly. It supports real-time updates which enable your applications to reflect changes instantly. Firestore is based on a managed infrastructure, relieving developers from server-side maintenance and scalability concerns. It integrates with other Google Cloud services making it a convenient choice for modern app development.

What are the key features?

Real-Time Updates: Firestore automatically synchronizes data across all connected clients in real-time.
Scaling: Dynamically scales to accommodate growing data and user demands.
Offline Persistence: Stores data locally so that applications remain usable in offline mode.
Database Queries: Supports sophisticated queries to filter and retrieve data efficiently.
Security: Provides robust rules-based security for data control.

What benefits and ROI considerations should users review?

Improved Development Speed: Simplifies syncing and storing data, saving development time.
Cost-Effective: Pay-as-you-go pricing model ensures costs align with usage.
Efficiency: Reduced need for backend development enhances productivity.
Reliability: Rest assured with dependable infrastructure that ensures availability.

Firestore is widely used in industries like retail, where apps require real-time inventory tracking and customer insights. In health tech, it's utilized for patient data management, ensuring real-time updates across platforms while adhering to security protocols. Educational tech companies implement the database to provide an interactive learning experience with live collaboration features.

Google

ScyllaDB is an open-source, distributed NoSQL wide-column datastore (a highly scalable NoSQL database), known for its compatibility with Apache Cassandra, and for supporting the same protocols as Cassandra (CQL and Thrift) and the same file formats (SSTable). ScyllaDB is designed for high throughput and low latency, making it suitable for data-intensive applications. Its architecture allows it to deliver remarkable performance on a massive scale, utilizing modern multi-core servers to their fullest potential

ScyllaDB utilizes a similar architecture, data format, and query language as Apache Cassandra, providing compatibility while dramatically improving speed and scalability.

The key advantages of ScyllaDB include its rewritten C++ implementation that eliminates Cassandra's expensive Java garbage collection pauses, built-in caching for fast access to frequently used data, and shard-aware drivers for direct routing of requests. This enables it to fully leverage modern multi-core servers for massive parallelism. The community is active and the latest major release, ScyllaDB Enterprise 2023.1.0 LTS, incorporates over 5,000 code commits focused on enhancing capabilities.

ScyllaDB supports wide-column data modeling for fast read performance at scale. It includes integrated monitoring and management tools to track database health and performance. For organizations looking to boost speed and reduce costs for NoSQL workloads, ScyllaDB offers a drop-in replacement for Cassandra that delivers lower latency, higher throughput, and increased scalability with fewer nodes. Its seamless migration path makes switching from Cassandra seamless, requiring minimal code changes.

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

IBM, Investing.com, mParticle, Comcast, GE, Fanatics, Ola, CERN, adgear, Samsung