Distributed Database vs Local Database

Pick CockroachDB when you need Postgres-wire compatibility plus zero-touch multi-region survivability and can live with source-available licensing (no CockroachDB-as-a-service from a competitor) meets developers should use a local database when building applications that require offline functionality, such as mobile apps or desktop software, to ensure data persistence without internet access. Here's our take.

Distributed Database

Nice Pick

Pick CockroachDB when you need Postgres-wire compatibility plus zero-touch multi-region survivability and can live with source-available licensing (no CockroachDB-as-a-service from a competitor)

Pros

• Pick TiDB instead if your app is already MySQL and you want HTAP without bolting on a separate warehouse
• Related to: postgresql, mysql

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

Local Database

Developers should use a local database when building applications that require offline functionality, such as mobile apps or desktop software, to ensure data persistence without internet access

Pros

• It is also ideal for prototyping, testing, or small projects where simplicity and low overhead are prioritized over scalability and multi-user access
• Related to: sqlite, indexeddb

Cons

• Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case

The Verdict

Use Distributed Database if: You want pick tidb instead if your app is already mysql and you want htap without bolting on a separate warehouse and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.

Use Local Database if: You prioritize it is also ideal for prototyping, testing, or small projects where simplicity and low overhead are prioritized over scalability and multi-user access over what Distributed Database offers.

The Bottom Line

Distributed Database wins

Pick CockroachDB when you need Postgres-wire compatibility plus zero-touch multi-region survivability and can live with source-available licensing (no CockroachDB-as-a-service from a competitor)