Databases · head to head
turbopuffer vs Turso

turbopuffer
Databases
Closed-source vector and full-text search service built directly on object storage, with cold queries measured in seconds rather than milliseconds.
- From
- $16/month
- Rated
- -

Turso
Databases
SQLite-lineage database platform for running very large numbers of small per-tenant databases, with an MIT-licensed engine.
- From
- Free
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Only Turso has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
- Each has a real cost: turbopuffer a cold namespace pays object storage latency on the first query, with a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents, so any interactive search box needs the data kept warm or the user waits about a second.; Turso sQLite allows one writer per database, so a single tenant's write throughput cannot be scaled horizontally and a busy tenant serialises against itself with no sharding option.
- They diverge on capability: turbopuffer covers Object storage architecture, Turso covers Per-tenant databases.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 30 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which turbopuffer and Turso actually diverge.
| Attribute | turbopuffer | Turso |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | $16/month | Free |
| Pricing model | subscription | freemium |
| Free tier | No | Yes |
Identical on both: platforms (Web), 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 turbopuffer
- Object storage architecture
- Namespaces
- Vector search
- Full-text search
- Attribute filtering
- Documented limits
- Configurable consistency
- Durable writes
Only in Turso
- Per-tenant databases
- MIT licence
- Embedded replicas
- SQLite compatibility
- HTTP access
- Branching
- Point-in-time restore
- In-process engine
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
turbopuffer
- A product with one search index per customer and thousands of customers, most of whose data is idle on any given daynot Turso
- Very large corpora where holding every vector in memory is the dominant cost and occasional cold-query latency is acceptablenot Turso
- Hybrid retrieval combining BM25 and vector search where running and synchronising two separate systems is the problem being solvednot Turso
- Retrieval for agent and assistant products where indexes are created and destroyed frequently and per-index overhead must be near zeronot Turso
Turso
- Multi-tenant SaaS where each customer gets their own database for real isolation, per-tenant restore and clean deletionnot turbopuffer
- Agent or session infrastructure that creates a throwaway database per task and destroys it afterwardsnot turbopuffer
- Local-first and offline-capable applications where an embedded replica serves reads at file speed and syncs when connectivity returnsnot turbopuffer
- Embedding a SQLite-compatible engine in a product where the public domain original's closed contribution model is a problemnot turbopuffer
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
turbopuffer
- A cold namespace pays object storage latency on the first query, with a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents, so any interactive search box needs the data kept warm or the user waits about a second.
- Queries are eventually consistent by default, and after roughly 128 MiB of outstanding writes new data is invisible until indexed, which the vendor puts at tens of seconds for small namespaces and tens of minutes for large ones, so a bulk re-index is not immediately queryable.
- It is closed source with no community edition, so single-tenant or bring-your-own-cloud deployment is a commercial negotiation rather than a deployment choice, and there is no path to running it yourself if the relationship ends.
- Per-namespace ceilings, roughly 10,000 writes per second, 32 MB/s and 500 million documents per shard, mean a single enormous index has to be sharded across namespaces by your application rather than by the service.
- It is a search engine, not a database: there are no joins, no cross-document transactions and no SQL, so it sits beside a primary datastore and keeping the two in step is work that belongs to you.
Turso
- SQLite allows one writer per database, so a single tenant's write throughput cannot be scaled horizontally and a busy tenant serialises against itself with no sharding option.
- Per-tenant databases mean per-tenant migrations, so every schema change becomes a fan-out job that must be idempotent and resumable, and multi-database schemas, the feature meant to solve this, is deprecated.
- There are no cross-database queries; ATTACH is deprecated on the cloud, so any report or analytic spanning tenants must be assembled in your application or in a separate warehouse you also operate.
- Data Edge, the multi-region edge replication that was Turso's original positioning, is deprecated, so a large share of the tutorials and articles describing Turso as an edge database describe behaviour you can no longer rely on.
- Three engine lineages share the name, SQLite, the libSQL fork and the Rust rewrite, and the Rust engine is still maturing, so SQLite compatibility needs verifying against your specific pragmas, extensions and query patterns; the cloud already restricts journal_mode and busy_timeout and makes user_version read-only.
Pricing, plan by plan
turbopuffer
$16/month- Launch$16/month
- All database features
- Multi-tenancy deployment
- SOC2 & GDPR-ready DPA
- Scale$256/month
- Everything in Launch
- HIPAA-ready BAA
- Single Sign-On (SSO)
- Enterprise$4096/month
- Everything in Scale
- Single-tenancy & BYOC deployment options
- Private networking
Turso
Free- FreeFree
- 100 databases
- 5 GB storage
- 500M monthly rows read
- Developer$4.99/month
- Unlimited databases
- 9 GB storage
- 2.5B monthly rows read
- Scaler$24.92/month
- Unlimited databases
- 24 GB storage
- 100B monthly rows read
- Pro$416.58/month
- Unlimited databases
- 50 GB storage
- 250B monthly rows read
Which should you pick?
Choose turbopuffer if
- You need object storage architecture.
- You also want namespaces.
Choose Turso if
- You need per-tenant databases.
- You want to start without paying.
- You also want mit licence.
Questions people ask
- Is turbopuffer or Turso better?
- Neither clearly leads. turbopuffer starts at $16/month and Turso at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, turbopuffer or Turso?
- Turso has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at $16/month for turbopuffer and Free for Turso.
- Does turbopuffer or Turso run on more platforms?
- Both run on Web, so platform support will not decide this one for you.
- Can I use Turso for free?
- Yes. Turso has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. turbopuffer starts at $16/month.
- What is turbopuffer best used for?
- turbopuffer is most often used for a product with one search index per customer and thousands of customers, most of whose data is idle on any given day, very large corpora where holding every vector in memory is the dominant cost and occasional cold-query latency is acceptable, hybrid retrieval combining bm25 and vector search where running and synchronising two separate systems is the problem being solved, retrieval for agent and assistant products where indexes are created and destroyed frequently and per-index overhead must be near zero. Of those, a product with one search index per customer and thousands of customers, most of whose data is idle on any given day and very large corpora where holding every vector in memory is the dominant cost and occasional cold-query latency is acceptable are not what Turso is typically brought in for.
- What can turbopuffer do that Turso cannot?
- turbopuffer covers Object storage architecture, Namespaces, Vector search, Full-text search. Turso covers Per-tenant databases, MIT licence, Embedded replicas, SQLite compatibility.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
turbopuffer: Can I self-host turbopuffer?
There is no open source or community edition. Single-tenant and bring-your-own-cloud deployments exist as commercial arrangements, but there is no way to run it independently of the vendor.
Turso: Is Turso just hosted SQLite?
Not exactly. It hosts databases built on the SQLite lineage: libSQL, an MIT fork of SQLite, and Turso Database, a newer Rust rewrite. The platform adds branching, backups, an HTTP API and programmatic database creation.
turbopuffer: How fast is it really?
Warm queries perform comparably to in-memory search engines. Cold queries, where data is not cached, have a documented p90 around 1,214 ms on a million documents. Write p90 is around 248 ms for a 512 KB upsert because writes go straight to object storage.
Turso: Can I really run a million databases?
That is the design goal and the platform API exists to make provisioning and deletion programmatic. The practical constraints are the ones that come with it: migrations fan out, and nothing can query across databases.
turbopuffer: Is it consistent?
Eventually consistent by default, with the vendor reporting that over 99.8% of queries return consistent data. Strong consistency can be requested per query at a latency cost. Large write bursts have a longer visibility delay while indexing catches up.
Turso: How do embedded replicas handle read-after-write?
Reads come from the local replica and writes go to the primary, so a read immediately after a write can return stale data unless you wait for a sync. Application code has to account for that rather than assume it.
turbopuffer: What is it best at?
Large numbers of namespaces where most are idle. The architecture makes cold data cheap to keep, which is exactly the shape of a multi-tenant product with a long tail of inactive customers.
Turso: What licence is it under?
libSQL and Turso Database are both MIT. Turso Cloud is a commercial managed service built on them, so the engine is genuinely open even though the platform is not.
turbopuffer: What are the hard limits?
Up to 128 billion documents and 256 TB per namespace, 500 million documents per shard, 64 MiB per document, 10,752 dense vector dimensions, roughly 10,000 writes per second per namespace and a maximum result set of 10,000.
Turso: Is Turso still an edge database?
No. Data Edge, the multi-region edge replication feature, is deprecated. The current positioning is per-tenant and embedded databases, and older material describing edge replication is out of date.
Related pages
More on turbopuffer
Other head to heads
- turbopuffer vs PostgreSQL
- turbopuffer vs Airtable
- turbopuffer vs Cockroach Labs
- turbopuffer vs Amazon Aurora
- turbopuffer vs Chroma
- turbopuffer vs BigQuery
- turbopuffer vs Dremio
- turbopuffer vs DuckDB
- turbopuffer vs Typesense
- turbopuffer vs Dragonfly
- turbopuffer vs LanceDB
- turbopuffer vs Readyset
- turbopuffer vs Valkey
- turbopuffer vs Apache Doris
- turbopuffer vs ArangoDB
- turbopuffer vs Canary Labs
- turbopuffer vs Apache Solr
- turbopuffer vs SurrealDB
- turbopuffer vs MotherDuck
- turbopuffer vs EMQX
- turbopuffer vs Nile
- turbopuffer vs SQLite
- turbopuffer vs Teradata
- turbopuffer vs Apache Kafka
- turbopuffer vs Instaclustr
- turbopuffer vs Knack
- turbopuffer vs Marqo
- turbopuffer vs Ninox
- Turso vs PostgreSQL
- Turso vs Airtable
- Turso vs Cockroach Labs
- Turso vs Amazon Aurora
- Turso vs Chroma
- Turso vs BigQuery
- Turso vs Dremio
- Turso vs DuckDB
- Turso vs Typesense
- Turso vs Dragonfly
- Turso vs LanceDB
- Turso vs Readyset
- Turso vs Valkey
- Turso vs Apache Doris
- Turso vs ArangoDB
- Turso vs Canary Labs
- Turso vs Apache Solr
- Turso vs SurrealDB
- Turso vs MotherDuck
- Turso vs EMQX
- Turso vs Nile
- Turso vs SQLite
- Turso vs Teradata
- Turso vs Apache Kafka
- Turso vs Instaclustr
- Turso vs Knack
- Turso vs Marqo
- Turso vs Ninox
