Databases · head to head
FaunaDB vs Memcached

FaunaDB
Databases
Document-relational database whose hosted service closed in 2025 and whose core is now unmaintained Apache 2.0 code.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: FaunaDB the hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.; Memcached no persistence at all: restart a node and its cache is gone, which every design must assume
- They diverge on capability: FaunaDB covers Document-relational model, Memcached covers In-memory key-value cache.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which FaunaDB and Memcached 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 FaunaDB
- Document-relational model
- FQL v10
- Distributed ACID transactions
- HTTPS access
- User-defined functions
- Attribute-based access control
- Document history
- Event streaming
Only in Memcached
- In-memory key-value cache
- Multithreaded
- Client-side sharding
- Predictable memory use
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
FaunaDB
- Keeping an existing Fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and fundednot Memcached
- Extracting historical data from a Fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted APInot Memcached
- Studying a production implementation of deterministic distributed transactions, since the full server source is now readable under Apache 2.0not Memcached
- Forking the engine deliberately, where an organisation has JVM and distributed-systems staff and wants a document-relational store it fully controlsnot Memcached
Memcached
- Caching expensive database query results to cut loadnot FaunaDB
- Session storage where losing sessions on restart is acceptablenot FaunaDB
- Fronting an API whose responses are costly and change slowlynot FaunaDB
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
FaunaDB
- The hosted service was wound down in 2025, so there is no managed Fauna to buy; every remaining user either operates a JVM cluster themselves or migrates, and both are projects rather than tasks.
- The open-sourced repository has had no substantive activity since May 2025 and the drivers were frozen alongside it, so you inherit responsibility for security patches in a Scala distributed database that almost nobody else is running.
- FQL has no wire or dialect compatibility with anything else, so migrating off is a rewrite of every query, index and access rule in the application rather than a data export.
- No BI tool, ORM or CDC connector speaks FQL, so reporting and analytics always required exporting the data first, and that export tooling is now also unmaintained.
- The community was small before the shutdown and has dispersed since, so operational answers, tuning advice and people who have run a Fauna cluster in anger are all scarce when something breaks.
Memcached
- No persistence at all: restart a node and its cache is gone, which every design must assume
- No replication or failover, so losing a node loses that share of the cache
- Only simple key-value, with none of the lists, sorted sets or streams Redis offers
- Values are capped at 1MB by default, which surprises teams caching large documents
Pricing, plan by plan
FaunaDB
Free- FreeFree
- 100K read ops
- 50K write ops
- 1GB storage
- Pro$25/month
- Pay per use
- Priority support
- Advanced features
Memcached
Free- MemcachedFree
- Full functionality
- Self-hosted
- No usage limits
Which should you pick?
Choose FaunaDB if
- You need document-relational model.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want fql v10.
Choose Memcached if
- You need in-memory key-value cache.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Self-hosted.
- You also want multithreaded.
Questions people ask
- Is FaunaDB or Memcached better?
- Neither clearly leads. FaunaDB starts at Free and Memcached at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, FaunaDB or Memcached?
- FaunaDB starts at Free and Memcached at Free.
- Does FaunaDB or Memcached run on more platforms?
- FaunaDB runs on Web. Memcached runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker, Self-hosted.
- Can I use FaunaDB for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is FaunaDB best used for?
- FaunaDB is most often used for keeping an existing fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and funded, extracting historical data from a fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted api, studying a production implementation of deterministic distributed transactions, since the full server source is now readable under apache 2.0, forking the engine deliberately, where an organisation has jvm and distributed-systems staff and wants a document-relational store it fully controls. Of those, keeping an existing fauna-backed application alive on self-hosted infrastructure while a migration is planned and funded and extracting historical data from a fauna dataset that can no longer be reached through the hosted api are not what Memcached is typically brought in for.
- What can FaunaDB do that Memcached cannot?
- FaunaDB covers Document-relational model, FQL v10, Distributed ACID transactions, HTTPS access. Memcached covers In-memory key-value cache, Multithreaded, Client-side sharding, Predictable memory use.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
FaunaDB: Can I still sign up for Fauna as a service?
No. Fauna Inc. wound down the hosted service in 2025 and the company website is no longer serving. The only way to run Fauna now is to build and operate the open-sourced server yourself.
Memcached: Is Memcached free?
Yes, open source with no licence fee.
FaunaDB: What licence is the open-sourced code under?
Apache 2.0, with the copyright held by a FaunaDB Foundation. That is a permissive OSI licence with no competing-use clause, so you may run it, modify it and even offer it as a service.
Memcached: Memcached or Redis?
Memcached is a pure cache: simpler, multithreaded and very predictable. Redis adds persistence, replication and rich data structures, which is why it is the default choice unless you specifically want a cache and nothing more.
FaunaDB: Is the open source version the same software that ran the cloud?
It is the core database engine. The control plane, billing, dashboard and multi-tenant operational tooling that made it a service are not part of the release, so you are running the engine, not the product.
Memcached: Does Memcached persist data?
No. Everything is in memory and lost on restart, by design.
FaunaDB: What should I migrate to?
There is no drop-in target. Teams that valued the document model with relationships usually land on Postgres with JSONB, and teams that valued the serverless HTTP access pattern usually land on DynamoDB or a managed Postgres with an HTTP driver. Either way the query layer is rewritten.
FaunaDB: How hard is it to self-host?
It builds as a fat JAR and runs as a multi-node JVM cluster. There is an OPERATING.md, but no supported packaging, no operator, no upstream releases and no support contract, so budget for a distributed-systems engineer, not a container.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Aurora
- FaunaDB vs PostgreSQL
- FaunaDB vs Airtable
- FaunaDB vs Cockroach Labs
- FaunaDB vs BigQuery
- FaunaDB vs CouchDB
- FaunaDB vs CosmosDB
- FaunaDB vs ArangoDB
- FaunaDB vs Dgraph
- FaunaDB vs DynamoDB
- FaunaDB vs Google Cloud SQL
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pinot
- FaunaDB vs Amazon RDS
- FaunaDB vs Apache Pulsar
- FaunaDB vs Cassandra
- FaunaDB vs Amazon Redshift
- FaunaDB vs Dragonfly
- FaunaDB vs Valkey
- FaunaDB vs Readyset
- FaunaDB vs DuckDB
- FaunaDB vs NATS
- FaunaDB vs Presto
- FaunaDB vs Timeplus
- FaunaDB vs RabbitMQ
- FaunaDB vs EMQX
- FaunaDB vs Firebase Realtime Database
- FaunaDB vs MotherDuck
- FaunaDB vs Neo4j
- FaunaDB vs Apache Kafka
- FaunaDB vs Firestore
- Memcached vs Amazon Aurora
- Memcached vs PostgreSQL
- Memcached vs Airtable
- Memcached vs Cockroach Labs
- Memcached vs BigQuery
- Memcached vs CouchDB
- Memcached vs CosmosDB
- Memcached vs ArangoDB
- Memcached vs Dgraph
- Memcached vs DynamoDB
- Memcached vs Google Cloud SQL
- Memcached vs Apache Pinot
- Memcached vs Amazon RDS
- Memcached vs Apache Pulsar
- Memcached vs Cassandra
- Memcached vs Amazon Redshift
- Memcached vs Dragonfly
- Memcached vs Valkey
- Memcached vs Readyset
- Memcached vs DuckDB
- Memcached vs NATS
- Memcached vs Presto
- Memcached vs Timeplus
- Memcached vs RabbitMQ
- Memcached vs EMQX
- Memcached vs Firebase Realtime Database
- Memcached vs MotherDuck
- Memcached vs Neo4j
- Memcached vs Apache Kafka
- Memcached vs Firestore
