Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

MariaDB vs PlanetScale comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2025

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

MariaDB
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (4th)
PlanetScale
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

KumarManish - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to deploy, cost-effective, and integrates seamlessly with other products
We had planned for an RDBMS version and not NoSQL. We use MariaDB Galera Cluster. It's a good product. It is cheap, scalable, performs well, and is efficient. We use GCP’s BigQuery for machine learning. We must follow the best practices of the tool. We missed some best practices like the storage engine and InnoDB. It was very difficult to identify why we were having performance issues. Then, we realized that some of our tables were still on MyISAM, the default storage engine. When we switched it back to the InnoDB, it was very smooth. InnoDB is the recommended one. We must follow the best practices given in the documentation during the initial setup. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.
Neeraj Sameer Allu - PeerSpot reviewer
Manages databases in serverless environments and easy to get started with
The main thing I didn't like about PlanetScale was that we couldn't run analytical queries on it. They bill based on the number of rows read, so even a simple count query could easily use up our allocated resources. Apart from that, I actually loved it. It's based on MySQL, so it doesn't have foreign key constraints or cascades. We have to delete manually or use an ORM. As it's based on MySQL, we can use log posters for complex queries, but it only supports MySQL. I feel like Postgres is more useful for custom or complex queries.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution."
"The solution's high availability is its most valuable aspect."
"It's easy to set up."
"Great monitoring and performance stability."
"The solution has PL/SQL compatibility."
"It is very simple to install, and the commands are exactly the same as MySQL."
"The solution runs very quickly. It's not slow at all."
"I haven't faced any technical issues with the product, and it works fine."
"I did not face any downtime when using the product."
"The branching feature is also good for developer experience."
"I like the solution's developer experience. When you deploy changes to the database in the portal, you can use different deployment strategies and see how things work. You can put changes into different branches, like deployment and staging. This is built into the product, allowing you to navigate changes through different branches."
"The database is accessible 24/7, ensuring my project runs smoothly without interruptions."
"The solution is beginner-friendly. Like any new platform, it can be a bit confusing at first. But after spending about an hour with it, you can get a clear idea of what everything is for. It's not very confusing; I think they've improved it recently."
 

Cons

"The GUI could be improved a bit. The user interface needs to be improved."
"Could have more integration with user platforms."
"Lacks time series data and additional driving support would be helpful."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in terms of security."
"I would like to see more compatibility going forward. This would help if there is a need to change databases."
"The solution can improve by having support for more integration. However, at this time it is working well for us."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements in the scalability and redundancy features."
"I used PlanetScale for hobby projects, so my perspective differs from someone using it commercially. Unfortunately, they've removed the free tier in recent months and pivoted to a business-to-business model. This is sad for hobby developers like me because it's a great product, but I understand they have costs to cover."
"When I tried to integrate the solution with Firebase for authentication, I faced some interruptions. Also, when using it with Next.js and NextAuth.js for Google and social logins, I had some troubles."
"I am not sure, but I think recently, the tool removed the free version."
"We encountered some initial issues during the product deployment, which required me to search for solutions on forums."
"The main thing I didn't like about PlanetScale was that we couldn't run analytical queries on it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product's price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high price since there are some support costs involved, even though it isn't an open-source solution."
"The licensing cost is approximately $4000.00 per year and the licensing is based on the software and the number of posts that you make."
"This is an open source solution with no licensing fees."
"The product is not expensive."
"It's an open-source solution."
"This is an open-source product, which can be used free of charge."
"MariaDB is open-source and self-hosted."
"There is a monthly subscription to use MariaDB."
"The solution is expensive for beginners. That's why I wasn't motivated to use it more. But they were already providing many features for free for beginners, which was great."
"I am currently using the product's free version, which has been sufficient for my portfolio project."
"Last time, when I wanted to use the tool in a project, I could see it was only paid, so I didn't use the service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about MariaDB?
The integration with other products is seamless.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MariaDB?
I have found the price of commercial MariaDB to be pretty steep, although not as high as Oracle. Customers often prefer the Community Edition because it's free.
What needs improvement with MariaDB?
The only potential area for improvement could be the pricing model, which might benefit from being more flexible or a bit cheaper.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PlanetScale?
I am currently using the product's free version, which has been sufficient for my portfolio project. The paid version ranges from $39 to $1,000, depending on the features and scale required.
What needs improvement with PlanetScale?
I would like PlanetScale to have a feature where the database can be accessed in the cloud with a link, allowing for a more user-friendly interface compared to the terminal. This would make it easi...
What is your primary use case for PlanetScale?
I have used PlanetScale as it is an advanced version of MySQL. It functions as a platform where MySQL is live, similar to AWS. I use PlanetScale to store data in a live environment where queries ca...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Google, Wikipedia, Tencent, Verizon, DBS Bank, Deutsche Bank, Telefónica, Huatai Securities
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about MariaDB vs. PlanetScale and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.