Databases · head to head
DuckDB vs TiDB

DuckDB
Databases
MIT-licensed analytical SQL database that runs inside your process, with no server, no dependencies and one writer at a time.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -

TiDB
Databases
Apache 2.0 distributed SQL database with MySQL wire compatibility and a separate columnar replica for analytical queries.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: DuckDB a database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.; TiDB a production cluster needs several placement driver, storage and SQL nodes before it is fault tolerant, so the minimum viable footprint is far larger than a MySQL server and TiDB is never the economical choice for a small database.
- They diverge on capability: DuckDB covers In-process execution, TiDB covers MySQL wire compatibility.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which DuckDB and TiDB actually diverge.
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 DuckDB
- In-process execution
- Vectorised columnar engine
- Direct file querying
- Zero dependencies
- Larger-than-memory queries
- MIT licence
- Postgres-flavoured SQL
- Extension ecosystem
Only in TiDB
- MySQL wire compatibility
- Horizontal write scaling
- Distributed ACID transactions
- TiFlash columnar replica
- Automatic rebalancing
- Raft replication
- Apache 2.0 licence
- Online schema change
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
DuckDB
- Transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need Spark, replaced by SQL over Parquet in a single processnot TiDB
- Analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptablenot TiDB
- Local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehousenot TiDB
- Continuous integration and testing of analytical SQL, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anythingnot TiDB
TiDB
- A MySQL workload that has hit the write ceiling of a single primary and would otherwise need an application-level sharding layernot DuckDB
- Reporting that must run against current transactional data, where the columnar replica removes the delay and the cost of an ETL pipelinenot DuckDB
- Multi-region deployments needing a single logical database with automatic failover rather than manual primary promotionnot DuckDB
- Migrating off a sharded MySQL estate where the sharding logic in the application has become the main source of bugs and operational toilnot DuckDB
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
DuckDB
- A database file accepts one read-write process at a time; other processes must open it read-only and will not see subsequent writes, so DuckDB cannot be the shared database behind several services.
- There is no network protocol, authentication or user management, so exposing it to remote clients means writing and securing your own service around it.
- It is built for scans and aggregations, not for many small transactions, so a workload of high-frequency single-row inserts and updates performs badly compared with SQLite or Postgres.
- Storage files are backwards compatible but not forwards compatible, so a file written by a newer version cannot be read by an older one and every consumer of a shared file must be upgraded together.
- Query memory settings matter: some operations still need to hold significant state, so an under-configured memory limit turns a large join or a high-cardinality aggregation into a spill-heavy query or an out-of-memory failure rather than a slow success.
TiDB
- A production cluster needs several placement driver, storage and SQL nodes before it is fault tolerant, so the minimum viable footprint is far larger than a MySQL server and TiDB is never the economical choice for a small database.
- Every transaction takes a timestamp from the placement driver and crosses the network to storage nodes, so simple point queries are slower than on single-node MySQL and latency-sensitive paths need to be measured, not assumed.
- MySQL compatibility is at the wire and dialect level but not complete; stored procedures, triggers and events are not supported, so an application that pushed logic into the database cannot simply be repointed.
- The columnar replica is an extra full copy of the data on its own nodes, so hybrid analytics roughly doubles storage and adds hardware that must be sized and paid for separately.
- Operating it well requires cluster-specific expertise in TiUP or the Kubernetes operator, region hot spots, and rebalancing behaviour, so the licence is free but the running cost includes an engineer who understands distributed storage.
Pricing, plan by plan
DuckDB
FreeNo published plan breakdown. See the DuckDB review.
TiDB
Free- ServerlessFree
- 5GB storage
- 50M request units
- Free forever tier
- Dedicated$250/month
- Dedicated resources
- SLA guarantees
- Enterprise support
Which should you pick?
Choose DuckDB if
- You need in-process execution.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly.
- You also want vectorised columnar engine.
Choose TiDB if
- You need mysql wire compatibility.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Cloud, AWS, Azure, Google Cloud Platform, Self-managed.
- You also want horizontal write scaling.
Questions people ask
- Is DuckDB or TiDB better?
- Neither clearly leads. DuckDB starts at Free and TiDB at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, DuckDB or TiDB?
- DuckDB starts at Free and TiDB at Free.
- Does DuckDB or TiDB run on more platforms?
- DuckDB runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, WebAssembly. TiDB runs on Cloud, AWS, Azure, Google Cloud Platform, Self-managed.
- Can I use DuckDB for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is DuckDB best used for?
- DuckDB is most often used for transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process, analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable, local exploration of files that are too large for a pandas dataframe but far too small to justify a warehouse, continuous integration and testing of analytical sql, where a real engine can run in the test process without provisioning anything. Of those, transformation steps in a data pipeline that would otherwise need spark, replaced by sql over parquet in a single process and analytical queries embedded in an application or a dashboard where shipping a database server alongside it is not acceptable are not what TiDB is typically brought in for.
- What can DuckDB do that TiDB cannot?
- DuckDB covers In-process execution, Vectorised columnar engine, Direct file querying, Zero dependencies. TiDB covers MySQL wire compatibility, Horizontal write scaling, Distributed ACID transactions, TiFlash columnar replica.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
DuckDB: Can multiple applications share one DuckDB database?
Not for writing. One process holds the database read-write; others may attach read-only and will not see later writes. Shared multi-writer access needs a different database or a table format with a catalogue.
TiDB: Is TiDB a drop-in replacement for MySQL?
At the protocol and dialect level it is close, and most applications connect unchanged. Stored procedures, triggers and events are not supported, and latency characteristics differ, so it needs testing rather than assumption.
DuckDB: Is it a replacement for a data warehouse?
For single-node analytical workloads up to a few hundred gigabytes it very often is. It is not a replacement when many concurrent users need a shared, governed, always-on service.
TiDB: What licence is it under?
Apache 2.0, for both TiDB and the underlying TiKV storage engine. TiKV is a graduated CNCF project, which is a meaningful governance signal in a market where several competitors moved to source-available licences.
DuckDB: Do I have to load data into it?
No. It queries Parquet, CSV, JSON and Arrow in place, including on object storage. Its own storage format is optional and mainly useful when you want indexes, constraints and faster repeated access.
TiDB: Do I need TiFlash?
Only for analytical queries. It is an optional columnar replica; without it TiDB is a distributed transactional database. With it you get analytics on live data at the cost of an additional full copy.
DuckDB: What is MotherDuck's relationship to it?
MotherDuck is a separate company offering a managed and hybrid service built on the DuckDB engine. DuckDB itself remains MIT-licensed and independent of it, with the IP held by the DuckDB Foundation.
TiDB: Is the managed cloud the same software?
TiDB Cloud runs the same engine, with the control plane, scaling and operational tooling provided as a service. The entry tier is metered differently from a dedicated cluster, so the cost model rather than the engine is what changes.
DuckDB: Is it suitable for OLTP?
No. It is designed for analytical scans. For transactional workloads with frequent small writes, SQLite or Postgres is the right tool.
TiDB: When is TiDB the wrong choice?
When the database is small enough for one server, when latency on single-row lookups is the primary constraint, or when the application depends on MySQL stored procedures and triggers.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- DuckDB vs SingleStore
- DuckDB vs SQLite
- DuckDB vs PostgreSQL
- DuckDB vs Cockroach Labs
- DuckDB vs Airtable
- DuckDB vs Amazon Aurora
- DuckDB vs ClickHouse
- DuckDB vs Apache Druid
- DuckDB vs Firebolt
- DuckDB vs OpenSearch
- DuckDB vs StarRocks
- DuckDB vs DataGrip
- DuckDB vs Estuary
- DuckDB vs Apache Pinot
- DuckDB vs Apache Pulsar
- DuckDB vs Cassandra
- DuckDB vs CouchDB
- DuckDB vs Vitess
- DuckDB vs Elasticsearch
- DuckDB vs BigQuery
- DuckDB vs Amazon Redshift
- DuckDB vs Couchbase
- DuckDB vs MariaDB
- DuckDB vs TimescaleDB
- DuckDB vs Redpanda
- DuckDB vs RisingWave
- DuckDB vs ScyllaDB
- DuckDB vs Solace PubSub+
- TiDB vs SingleStore
- TiDB vs SQLite
- TiDB vs PostgreSQL
- TiDB vs Cockroach Labs
- TiDB vs Airtable
- TiDB vs Amazon Aurora
- TiDB vs ClickHouse
- TiDB vs Apache Druid
- TiDB vs Firebolt
- TiDB vs OpenSearch
- TiDB vs StarRocks
- TiDB vs DataGrip
- TiDB vs Estuary
- TiDB vs Apache Pinot
- TiDB vs Apache Pulsar
- TiDB vs Cassandra
- TiDB vs CouchDB
- TiDB vs Vitess
- TiDB vs Elasticsearch
- TiDB vs BigQuery
- TiDB vs Amazon Redshift
- TiDB vs Couchbase
- TiDB vs MariaDB
- TiDB vs TimescaleDB
- TiDB vs Redpanda
- TiDB vs RisingWave
- TiDB vs ScyllaDB
- TiDB vs Solace PubSub+
