Softwr

Databases · head to head

Apache Pulsar vs PlanetScale

Apache Pulsar logo

Apache Pulsar

Databases

Cloud-native messaging and streaming with separated storage

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
PlanetScale logo

PlanetScale

Databases

The MySQL-compatible serverless database

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Apache Pulsar more components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating; PlanetScale pricing varies significantly across 17+ AWS and GCP regions
  • They diverge on capability: Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage, PlanetScale covers Database Branching.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Apache Pulsar and PlanetScale actually diverge.

Attributes where Apache Pulsar and PlanetScale differ
AttributeApache PulsarPlanetScale
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feeusage-based
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hostedCloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure)
FoundedUnknown2018

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Databases).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Apache Pulsar

  • Separated storage
  • Queuing and streaming
  • Built-in multi-tenancy
  • Geo-replication

Only in PlanetScale

  • Database Branching
  • Non-blocking Schema Changes
  • Insights
  • Horizontal Scaling
  • Connection Pooling
  • Query Caching
  • Automatic Backups
  • Global Replication

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Apache Pulsar

  • Platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systemsnot PlanetScale
  • Multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirementnot PlanetScale
  • Deployments where storage and traffic grow at genuinely different ratesnot PlanetScale

PlanetScale

  • MySQL-compatible applications requiring horizontal scalingnot Apache Pulsar
  • PostgreSQL deployments with custom cluster configurationsnot Apache Pulsar
  • Multi-region database deployments on AWS or GCPnot Apache Pulsar
  • Applications requiring transparent sharding via Vitessnot Apache Pulsar

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Apache Pulsar

  • More components than Kafka: brokers, BookKeeper and ZooKeeper each need operating
  • Correspondingly harder to run well, and the expertise is rarer than Kafka expertise
  • A much smaller ecosystem of connectors, tooling and hiring pool than Kafka
  • The architectural advantages only pay off at a scale most deployments never reach

PlanetScale

  • Pricing varies significantly across 17+ AWS and GCP regions
  • Additional costs for EBS storage beyond base tier, backup storage, and egress
  • Dedicated PgBouncer and replicas incur separate charges
  • Metal tier pricing increases sharply with larger configurations

Pricing, plan by plan

Apache Pulsar

Free
  • Apache PulsarFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

PlanetScale

Free
  • Postgres EBS Single-Node (ARM64 PS-5)$5/month
    • 512 MiB RAM
    • Single-node configuration
    • EBS storage included
  • Postgres EBS HA (ARM64 PS-5)$15/month
    • 512 MiB RAM
    • 3-node high-availability setup
    • 1 primary + 2 replicas
  • Postgres Metal (M-10)$50/month
    • 1/8 vCPU, 1 GiB RAM
    • 3-node HA configuration
    • 10 GiB NVMe storage included
  • Vitess Non-Metal 3-Node$39/month
    • Sharding-capable database
    • x86-64 architecture
    • 3-node configuration

Which should you pick?

Choose Apache Pulsar if

  • You need separated storage.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted.
  • You also want queuing and streaming.
Apache Pulsar review

Choose PlanetScale if

  • You need database branching.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Cloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure).
  • You also want non-blocking schema changes.
PlanetScale review

Questions people ask

Is Apache Pulsar or PlanetScale better?
Neither clearly leads. Apache Pulsar starts at Free and PlanetScale at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Apache Pulsar or PlanetScale?
Apache Pulsar starts at Free and PlanetScale at Free.
Does Apache Pulsar or PlanetScale run on more platforms?
Apache Pulsar runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Self-hosted. PlanetScale runs on Cloud-hosted (AWS, GCP, Azure).
Can I use Apache Pulsar for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Apache Pulsar best used for?
Apache Pulsar is most often used for platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systems, multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirement, deployments where storage and traffic grow at genuinely different rates. Of those, platforms needing both work queues and replayable streams without running two systems and multi-tenant messaging where isolation between teams is a requirement are not what PlanetScale is typically brought in for.
What can Apache Pulsar do that PlanetScale cannot?
Apache Pulsar covers Separated storage, Queuing and streaming, Built-in multi-tenancy, Geo-replication. PlanetScale covers Database Branching, Non-blocking Schema Changes, Insights, Horizontal Scaling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Apache Pulsar: Is Apache Pulsar free?

Yes, open source under the Apache Software Foundation.

PlanetScale: How much does a PlanetScale Postgres database cost per month?

PlanetScale Postgres pricing starts at $5/month for single-node ARM64 configurations with 512 MiB RAM and $15/month for the same specs in high-availability mode with 1 primary and 2 replicas. Metal tier starts at $50/month for M-10 configuration (1/8 vCPU, 1 GiB RAM). Exact pricing depends on cluster size, node architecture (ARM64 vs x86-64), storage configuration, and selected AWS/GCP region.

Source
Apache Pulsar: Pulsar or Kafka?

Pulsar separates storage from compute and covers queuing and streaming in one system. Kafka has a far larger ecosystem and hiring pool. Most teams should have a specific reason before choosing Pulsar.

PlanetScale: Is there a free tier for PlanetScale?

PlanetScale offers a free tier for development and testing workloads. After free tier limits are reached, usage-based pricing applies starting at $5/month for the smallest Postgres single-node configuration, with costs scaling based on cluster size, compute, storage, and additional features like dedicated PgBouncer or replicas.

Source
Apache Pulsar: Why does separated storage matter?

Brokers hold no data, so adding or replacing one requires no rebalancing, and storage can grow without adding serving capacity.

PlanetScale: What is the difference between PlanetScale ARM64 and x86-64 pricing?

ARM64 instances cost significantly less than x86-64 equivalents. For example, a Postgres EBS HA cluster with 512 MiB RAM costs $15/month on ARM64 but $39/month on x86-64. This pricing difference extends across all cluster sizes, with larger x86-64 configurations reaching up to $5,599/month compared to ARM64 alternatives.

Source
PlanetScale: What is included in a PlanetScale cluster price versus additional costs?

The advertised cluster price covers the base compute and configured storage. Additional charges apply for EBS storage beyond the base allocation, backup storage, data egress, optional dedicated PgBouncer connections, and replicas beyond the base high-availability configuration. Regional pricing varies across 17+ AWS and GCP zones.

Source
Share

Related pages

More on Apache Pulsar

More on PlanetScale

Keep looking

Other head to heads