Google Cloud Firestore vs ScyllaDB comparison

Read 12 ScyllaDB reviews

2,015 Views
1,995 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: March 2026).

Google Cloud Firestore vs. ScyllaDB

Download the complete report

Helped 885,311 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

15th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed NoSQL Databases (11th)

ScyllaDB

Ranking in NoSQL Databases

4th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Google Cloud Firestore is 3.0%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ScyllaDB is 7.3%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

NoSQL Databases Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
ScyllaDB	7.3%
Google Cloud Firestore	3.0%
Other	89.7%

NoSQL Databases

Featured Reviews

PrathapSankar

engagement Manager at Capgemini

Has simplified backend development for moderate user applications and supports efficient real-time data updates

A simplified way of building a logical layer on top of Firebase is necessary. Currently, the only option is to use cloud functions or Cloud Run functions. If they come up with an easier way of handling the logical layer between the frontend and backend, that would be beneficial. The UI of Firebase is much better compared to AWS or other Azure, but there is still scope for improving the usability of the UI. Additionally, some more AI features for automation can be added. The security layer can be enhanced, as currently, for data handling, there is just rule-based security; they can add one more layer of data security.

Read full review

Manikandan Gunasekaran

Director of Engineering at Ola

Reliable data management with great reliability and performance

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. There's also an issue with compatibility when attempting to switch back from the enterprise to the community version.

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

"One of the main features of Google Cloud Firestore's document management is the real-time listener; whenever there are any changes in the data, all the documents and applications that are reading through that particular document get automatically notified that there was some change, and automatically all the data gets refreshed."

"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."

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

"ScyllaDB is very fast, and I can use it for so many things."

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

"The product's most valuable features are efficiency and reliability."

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

"The performance and scalability are good, and we hardly see any major issues with ScyllaDB."

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

"ScyllaDB allows fine-tuning of the table structure. Speed is probably the most critical factor because we perform a lot of heavy data ingestion. One of its core features is its ability to handle high volumes and maintain speed when accessing data. Additionally, high availability and partitioning are built-in features of ScyllaDB."

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."

"For lower volumes, it works fine, but once the volume increases, for use cases where the total number of users is less than 100,000 a month, Firebase is cheaper. But once you go beyond that, it becomes very expensive."

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

"ScyllaDB needs to improve its handling of transactions."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"Support and the availability of support need improvement. I would give them a six out of ten."

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

More ScyllaDB cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It's free."

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

"It's a bit expensive."

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

885,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Comms Service Provider

13%

University

13%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

11%

Outsourcing Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	8

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Google Cloud Firestore?

What is your primary use case for Google Cloud Firestore?

Firebase is our main backend, so for managing authentications, for managing the backend database, and building cloud functions, it is all through Firebase. In the case of Google Cloud Firestore, th...

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

I have experience with Firebase, especially Firebase, then Google Cloud Computing Engine, and then Google Firebase Studio. Google Cloud Firestore is one of the offerings in Firebase, which is basic...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Scylla?

From what I’ve seen (and experienced), ScyllaDB pricing is very dependent on how you deploy it, and that’s where most of the confusion comes from.

What needs improvement with Scylla?

What is your primary use case for Scylla?

We dump a lot of our data, such as every entry created with respect to when a user rides a scooter, every record gets updated to ScyllaDB. It is used as a single source of truth and it manages mass...

MongoDB Atlas vs Google Cloud Firestore

Comparisons

Compared 27% of the time

Amazon DynamoDB vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 14% of the time

Redis vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 13% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 12% of the time

Couchbase Enterprise vs Google Cloud Firestore

Compared 11% of the time

More Google Cloud Firestore Competitors

Redis vs ScyllaDB

Compared 17% of the time

MongoDB Enterprise Advanced vs ScyllaDB

Compared 13% of the time

Apache HBase vs ScyllaDB

Compared 10% of the time

Cassandra vs ScyllaDB

Compared 10% of the time

Couchbase Enterprise vs ScyllaDB

Compared 10% of the time

More ScyllaDB Competitors

Product Reports

NoSQL Databases

Download Google Cloud Firestore product report

Download ScyllaDB product report

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

Google Cloud Firestore vs. ScyllaDB