Softwr

Databases · head to head

Google Cloud SQL vs VerneMQ

Google Cloud SQL logo

Google Cloud SQL

Databases

Fully managed relational database service for MySQL, PostgreSQL, and SQL Server

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: Google Cloud SQL locked into Google Cloud ecosystem with limited cross-cloud portability; 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: Google Cloud SQL covers High Availability, VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Google Cloud SQL and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where Google Cloud SQL and VerneMQ differ
AttributeGoogle Cloud SQLVerneMQ
Pricing modelusage-basedquote
PlatformsGoogle Cloud PlatformLinux, 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 Google Cloud SQL

  • High Availability
  • Automated Backups
  • Point-in-time Recovery
  • Encryption
  • Regional/Zonal Instances
  • Read Replicas
  • Private IP
  • BigQuery

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.

Google Cloud SQL

  • Transaction processingnot VerneMQ
  • Data storagenot VerneMQ
  • Application backendnot VerneMQ
  • Reportingnot VerneMQ
  • Data analyticsnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

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

Where each one falls short

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

Google Cloud SQL

  • Locked into Google Cloud ecosystem with limited cross-cloud portability
  • Pay-as-you-go pricing can become expensive with unpredictable workloads
  • Limited customization options compared to self-managed databases

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

Google Cloud SQL

Free
  • Free TierFree
    • db-f1-micro instance
    • 30GB storage
    • Limited usage
  • Standard$25/month
    • High availability
    • Automated backups
    • Point-in-time recovery

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 Google Cloud SQL if

  • You need high availability.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Google Cloud Platform.
  • You also want automated backups.
Google Cloud SQL 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 Google Cloud SQL or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. Google Cloud SQL 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, Google Cloud SQL or VerneMQ?
Google Cloud SQL starts at Free and VerneMQ at Free.
Does Google Cloud SQL or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
Google Cloud SQL runs on Google Cloud Platform. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes.
Can I use Google Cloud SQL for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Google Cloud SQL best used for?
Google Cloud SQL is most often used for transaction processing, data storage, application backend, reporting. Of those, transaction processing and data storage are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can Google Cloud SQL do that VerneMQ cannot?
Google Cloud SQL covers High Availability, Automated Backups, Point-in-time Recovery, Encryption. VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Google Cloud SQL: What database engines does Google Cloud SQL support?

Google Cloud SQL supports MySQL, PostgreSQL, and SQL Server. Users can choose their preferred engine when provisioning an instance and Google handles automated backups, replication, patching, and scaling.

Source
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.

Google Cloud SQL: Does Google Cloud SQL have a free tier?

Google Cloud SQL does not have a free tier, though new users receive free trial credits from Google Cloud Platform. Pricing is based on compute resources (CPU and memory) and storage used, with options for committed use discounts.

Source
VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

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

Google Cloud SQL: Can Google Cloud SQL scale automatically?

Yes. Cloud SQL automatically scales database storage and compute resources to handle increased workloads without manual intervention, and includes automated backups and high availability configurations.

Source
VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

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

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.

Share

Related pages

More on Google Cloud SQL

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads