Pick / avoid summary (fast)
Skim these triggers to pick a default, then validate with the quick checks and constraints below.
- ✓ MySQL-compatible relational option with modern workflows
- ✓ Often evaluated when teams want serverless model and scaling patterns
- ✓ Can be a strong fit for teams preferring MySQL ecosystem
- ✓ Distributed SQL model for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns
- ✓ Often shortlisted when multi-region resilience becomes a requirement
- ✓ Managed cloud offering reduces some operational burden versus self-managed distributed databases
- × Not Postgres; ecosystem and features differ from Postgres-centric stacks
- × Operational constraints and limits must be validated
- × Distributed SQL complexity and operating model is higher than single-region Postgres
- × Requires careful validation of data model, consistency, and performance assumptions
-
CheckTreat distributed SQL as a resilience-driven choice, not a generic upgrade.
-
The trade-offMySQL-first workflow and compatibility vs distributed resilience and complexity.
At-a-glance comparison
PlanetScale
Serverless MySQL platform (Vitess-based) evaluated when teams want MySQL compatibility plus modern workflows and horizontal scaling patterns.
- ✓ MySQL-compatible relational option with modern workflows
- ✓ Often evaluated when teams want serverless model and scaling patterns
- ✓ Can be a strong fit for teams preferring MySQL ecosystem
CockroachDB Cloud
Managed distributed SQL database with Postgres-compatible interfaces, evaluated when teams need resilience and scaling patterns beyond a single-region Postgres operating model.
- ✓ Distributed SQL model for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns
- ✓ Often shortlisted when multi-region resilience becomes a requirement
- ✓ Managed cloud offering reduces some operational burden versus self-managed distributed databases
What breaks first (decision checks)
These checks reflect the common constraints that decide between PlanetScale and CockroachDB Cloud in this category.
If you only read one section, read this — these are the checks that force redesigns or budget surprises.
- Real trade-off: A MySQL-compatible serverless workflow with modern developer ergonomics vs distributed SQL optimized for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns.
- Operational model and ownership: Define your scaling path (single region vs multi-region resilience)
- Ecosystem alignment vs portability: Identify integration gravity (identity, networking, observability)
Implementation gotchas
These are the practical downsides teams tend to discover during setup, rollout, or scaling.
Where PlanetScale surprises teams
- Not Postgres; ecosystem and features differ from Postgres-centric stacks
- Operational constraints and limits must be validated
- Migration and data model decisions still carry switching costs
Where CockroachDB Cloud surprises teams
- Distributed SQL complexity and operating model is higher than single-region Postgres
- Requires careful validation of data model, consistency, and performance assumptions
- Migration cost can be significant if chosen prematurely
Pros and cons
PlanetScale
Pros
- + MySQL-compatible relational option with modern workflows
- + Often evaluated when teams want serverless model and scaling patterns
- + Can be a strong fit for teams preferring MySQL ecosystem
- + Good fit when you want a modern workflow around a MySQL-compatible database
- + A clear alternative when you want MySQL compatibility but don’t want to self-manage MySQL operations
Cons
- − Not Postgres; ecosystem and features differ from Postgres-centric stacks
- − Operational constraints and limits must be validated
- − Migration and data model decisions still carry switching costs
- − Platform coupling can create switching cost if you adopt platform-specific workflows deeply
- − You must validate production constraints early to avoid rework later
- − Not a fit if your stack is deeply Postgres-centric and you need Postgres compatibility
CockroachDB Cloud
Pros
- + Distributed SQL model for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns
- + Often shortlisted when multi-region resilience becomes a requirement
- + Managed cloud offering reduces some operational burden versus self-managed distributed databases
- + A clear option when single-region database risk becomes unacceptable
- + Designed around higher availability goals (at the cost of complexity)
Cons
- − Distributed SQL complexity and operating model is higher than single-region Postgres
- − Requires careful validation of data model, consistency, and performance assumptions
- − Migration cost can be significant if chosen prematurely
- − More moving parts and conceptual load than managed Postgres
- − Not every OLTP workload benefits; cost/complexity can be overkill early
- − Teams may underestimate the fit validation needed for distributed databases
Keep exploring this category
If you’re close to a decision, the fastest next step is to read 1–2 more head-to-head briefs, then confirm pricing limits in the product detail pages.
FAQ
How do you choose between PlanetScale and CockroachDB Cloud?
Choose PlanetScale when MySQL compatibility is required and you want a modern serverless workflow around a MySQL-compatible database. Choose CockroachDB Cloud when you need distributed SQL resilience patterns (often multi-region) and can accept added complexity. The decision is MySQL-first workflow vs distributed resilience.
When should you pick PlanetScale?
Pick PlanetScale when: MySQL-compatible relational option with modern workflows; Often evaluated when teams want serverless model and scaling patterns; Can be a strong fit for teams preferring MySQL ecosystem; Good fit when you want a modern workflow around a MySQL-compatible database.
When should you pick CockroachDB Cloud?
Pick CockroachDB Cloud when: Distributed SQL model for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns; Often shortlisted when multi-region resilience becomes a requirement; Managed cloud offering reduces some operational burden versus self-managed distributed databases; A clear option when single-region database risk becomes unacceptable.
What’s the real trade-off between PlanetScale and CockroachDB Cloud?
A MySQL-compatible serverless workflow with modern developer ergonomics vs distributed SQL optimized for resilience and horizontal scaling patterns.
What’s the most common mistake buyers make in this comparison?
Assuming distributed SQL is the natural next step from MySQL when the real requirement might be workflow improvements, HA architecture, or operational discipline.
What’s the fastest elimination rule?
Pick PlanetScale if MySQL compatibility is a hard requirement.
What breaks first with PlanetScale?
Choosing MySQL compatibility when your org is actually Postgres-centric (mismatch costs later). Production constraints that weren’t validated early (limits, operational expectations). Cost predictability once usage grows without guardrails.
What are the hidden constraints of PlanetScale?
Validate production constraints and cost drivers early. Switching costs exist if data model and workflow become coupled. Have an explicit exit plan if requirements later force a different operating model.
Share this comparison
Sources & verification
We prefer to link primary references (official pricing, documentation, and public product pages). If links are missing, treat this as a seeded brief until verification is completed.