Softwr

Databases · head to head

BigQuery vs VerneMQ

BigQuery logo

BigQuery

Databases

Google Cloud's serverless analytical warehouse, billed either by bytes scanned per query or by reserved compute slots.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
VerneMQ logo

VerneMQ

Databases

Erlang MQTT broker whose source is Apache 2.0 but whose official binaries need a paid subscription

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: BigQuery on-demand billing charges for bytes read from every column a query references, so an unqualified select or a missing partition filter turns a routine query into a large bill, and the cost is discovered after the fact rather than at review time.; VerneMQ the official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • They diverge on capability: BigQuery covers Serverless compute, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which BigQuery and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where BigQuery and VerneMQ differ
AttributeBigQueryVerneMQ
Pricing modelusage-basedquote
PlatformsWeb, Cloud APILinux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes
Founded2008Unknown

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 BigQuery

  • Serverless compute
  • Separation of storage and compute
  • Two pricing models
  • Partitioning and clustering
  • Materialised views
  • BigQuery ML
  • Storage Write API
  • BI Engine

Only in VerneMQ

  • Erlang/OTP clustering
  • MQTT 5.0 support
  • Plugin system
  • Backpressure handling
  • Bridge support
  • Metrics export
  • MQTT over WebSockets
  • Pluggable auth backends

What people use each for

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

BigQuery

  • A warehouse for an organisation already on Google Cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same placenot VerneMQ
  • Bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster runningnot VerneMQ
  • Event and clickstream analytics ingested continuously through the Storage Write API and queried without a load windownot VerneMQ
  • Analytics teams with no infrastructure staff, where the absence of anything to tune or patch is worth more than dialect portabilitynot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

  • An industrial operator that wants an MQTT broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not usenot BigQuery
  • A team building from source to stay strictly under Apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglementnot BigQuery
  • A deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in Lua or over a webhooknot BigQuery
  • An organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small European company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licencesnot BigQuery

Where each one falls short

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

BigQuery

  • On-demand billing charges for bytes read from every column a query references, so an unqualified select or a missing partition filter turns a routine query into a large bill, and the cost is discovered after the fact rather than at review time.
  • There is no way to join tables that live in different regions, so a data estate split across regions for residency reasons has to be reconciled with copies and the storage and transfer that implies.
  • It is not built for point lookups; retrieving a single row has latency measured in hundreds of milliseconds or more, so BigQuery cannot serve an application's read path and always needs a second store in front of it.
  • Frequent small mutations run into DML concurrency limits and the cost of rewriting storage blocks, so a workload that updates individual rows continuously behaves badly compared with an append-only design.
  • The compute exists only inside Google Cloud, so while tables can be exported, the accumulated GoogleSQL, scheduled queries, authorised views, ML models and IAM structure do not move, and switching warehouses is a rewrite of the analytical layer.

VerneMQ

  • The official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit.
  • Octavo Labs is a very small company, so support depth, response times and the bus factor on the codebase are materially thinner than at HiveMQ or EMQ.
  • There is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service.
  • Operating an Erlang cluster requires runtime knowledge that most teams do not have and will use for nothing else in their stack.
  • There is no vendor-managed cloud offering, so every deployment is self-operated with the infrastructure and on-call cost that implies.

Pricing, plan by plan

BigQuery

Free
  • Free TierFree
    • 1TB queries/month
    • 10GB storage/month
    • Standard support
  • On-demand$6.25/TB
    • Pay per query
    • Pay per storage
    • All features

VerneMQ

Free
  • Source buildFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed source from GitHub
    • Full clustering and plugin capability
    • You compile and package it yourself
  • Binary packages and Docker images$undefined/year
    • Covered by the VerneMQ EULA, not Apache 2.0
    • Yearly usage subscription expected for commercial use
    • Official builds and Docker images
  • Commercial support$undefined/year
    • Evaluation, customisation and operations assistance
    • Custom development
    • Long-term maintenance agreements

Which should you pick?

Choose BigQuery if

  • You need serverless compute.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Cloud API.
  • You also want separation of storage and compute.
BigQuery review

Choose VerneMQ if

  • You need erlang/otp clustering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
  • You also want mqtt 5.0 support.
VerneMQ review

Questions people ask

Is BigQuery or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. BigQuery starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, BigQuery or VerneMQ?
BigQuery starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does BigQuery or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
BigQuery runs on Web, Cloud API. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use BigQuery for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is BigQuery best used for?
BigQuery is most often used for a warehouse for an organisation already on google cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same place, bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster running, event and clickstream analytics ingested continuously through the storage write api and queried without a load window, analytics teams with no infrastructure staff, where the absence of anything to tune or patch is worth more than dialect portability. Of those, a warehouse for an organisation already on google cloud, where identity, logging and billing are consolidated in the same place and bursty analytical workloads with long idle periods, where paying per query beats keeping a cluster running are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can BigQuery do that VerneMQ cannot?
BigQuery covers Serverless compute, Separation of storage and compute, Two pricing models, Partitioning and clustering. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

BigQuery: How is BigQuery actually billed?

Storage is billed separately from compute. Compute is either on-demand, priced by the bytes a query reads from the referenced columns, or capacity-based, where you reserve autoscaling slots. Most cost surprises come from on-demand queries that scan more than expected.

VerneMQ: Is VerneMQ free?

The source is Apache 2.0 and free. The official binary packages and Docker images are covered by a separate EULA that expects a yearly fee for commercial use.

BigQuery: How do I control query cost?

Partition and cluster tables so queries prune data, select only the columns needed, use materialised views for repeated aggregations, and set maximum bytes billed on queries so a runaway scan fails instead of billing.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

Yes. Octavo Labs AG in Zurich continues to publish 2.x releases, most recently in 2026.

BigQuery: Can I use it without being on Google Cloud?

The service only runs on Google Cloud. BigQuery Omni can query data held in S3 or Azure storage, but the compute is still Google's and the account relationship is still with Google.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

No. Every deployment is self-hosted, with commercial support available from Octavo Labs.

BigQuery: Is it suitable for serving application queries?

No. Latency for single-row reads is far too high. BigQuery is an analytical warehouse and application read paths need a transactional database or a cache in front of it.

VerneMQ: How does it compare to EMQX?

Narrower in features and without a rule engine, but with a simpler licence story for source builds after EMQX moved to BSL.

BigQuery: When should I move from on-demand to capacity pricing?

When on-demand spend becomes both large and predictable, or when unpredictable spend is a bigger problem than query queueing. The switch trades a variable bill for a fixed one plus contention between workloads.

Share

Related pages

More on BigQuery

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads