Softwr

Databases · head to head

VerneMQ vs Xata

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
Xata logo

Xata

Databases

Apache 2.0 platform for running many Postgres instances on Kubernetes, with copy-on-write branching and scale-to-zero.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: 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.; Xata self-hosting means operating Kubernetes and CloudNativePG, so the Apache 2.0 licence removes the vendor bill but replaces it with a platform team, and a database platform is not something a part-time operator maintains safely.
  • They diverge on capability: VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, Xata covers Copy-on-write branching.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which VerneMQ and Xata actually diverge.

Attributes where VerneMQ and Xata differ
AttributeVerneMQXata
Pricing modelquoteusage-based
PlatformsLinux, Docker, macOS, KubernetesWeb

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 VerneMQ

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

Only in Xata

  • Copy-on-write branching
  • Scale-to-zero compute
  • Compute autoscaling and bin-packing
  • High availability with failover
  • Point-in-time recovery
  • Serverless driver
  • pgroll migrations
  • pgstream replication

What people use each for

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

VerneMQ

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

Xata

  • Giving every pull request or coding agent its own branch of the production database, with real data volumes rather than a seeded fixturenot VerneMQ
  • Running managed-Postgres economics in your own cloud account where data residency or compliance rules out a third-party control planenot VerneMQ
  • Consolidating many small, mostly idle Postgres databases onto shared infrastructure where scale-to-zero and bin-packing recover the idle costnot VerneMQ
  • Testing a destructive migration against a copy of production without waiting for a full restore or paying for a duplicate of the storagenot VerneMQ

Where each one falls short

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

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.

Xata

  • Self-hosting means operating Kubernetes and CloudNativePG, so the Apache 2.0 licence removes the vendor bill but replaces it with a platform team, and a database platform is not something a part-time operator maintains safely.
  • Copy-on-write branches are cheap to create but diverge as they are written to, so a long-lived branch carrying a heavy backfill quietly accumulates real storage and the cost arrives later than the decision that caused it.
  • Scale-to-zero means the first connection after an idle period pays a cold start, which is invisible in a busy production database and very visible in a demo, a staging environment or a cron job that runs once an hour.
  • The Xata sold before 2025 was a different product, a proprietary API and SDK layered over Postgres, so tutorials, blog posts and SDK examples from that era describe something that no longer exists and existing users had to migrate.
  • As a managed service it competes with RDS, Aurora and Cloud SQL, and it is a much smaller company, so procurement, certification coverage and the depth of the support bench behind a 3am corruption incident are all weaker than the incumbent even though the underlying Postgres is the same.

Pricing, plan by plan

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

Xata

Free
  • Free TrialFree
    • 14 days free
    • No credit card required
  • Usage-Based$1/per 1000 branches
    • 1,000 branches for $1
    • Scale-to-zero compute model
    • Branches hibernate when idle

Which should you pick?

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

Choose Xata if

  • You need copy-on-write branching.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want scale-to-zero compute.
Xata review

Questions people ask

Is VerneMQ or Xata better?
Neither clearly leads. VerneMQ starts at Free and Xata at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, VerneMQ or Xata?
VerneMQ starts at Free and Xata at Free.
Does VerneMQ or Xata run on more platforms?
VerneMQ runs on Linux, Docker, macOS, Kubernetes. Xata runs on Web.
Can I use VerneMQ for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is VerneMQ best used for?
VerneMQ is most often used for an industrial operator that wants an mqtt broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not use, a team building from source to stay strictly under apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglement, a deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in lua or over a webhook, an organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small european company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licences. Of those, an industrial operator that wants an mqtt broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not use and a team building from source to stay strictly under apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglement are not what Xata is typically brought in for.
What can VerneMQ do that Xata cannot?
VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling. Xata covers Copy-on-write branching, Scale-to-zero compute, Compute autoscaling and bin-packing, High availability with failover.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Xata: Is it real Postgres or a compatible reimplementation?

Real Postgres. It runs upstream Postgres instances on Kubernetes via CloudNativePG, so extensions, the wire protocol and version upgrades behave as they do anywhere else.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

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

Xata: Can I self-host the whole thing?

Yes. The platform is Apache 2.0 and designed for self-hosting a large number of Postgres instances on your own Kubernetes. Xata Cloud is the same platform run as a service.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

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

Xata: Does branching copy my data?

No. Branches are copy-on-write at the storage layer, so creating one is near-instant regardless of database size and storage is only consumed as the branch diverges from its parent.

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.

Xata: Is this the same Xata I used a couple of years ago?

No. The earlier product was a proprietary database API with its own SDK and search layer. The current product is a Postgres platform, and material written for the old one does not apply.

Xata: What happens to a branch when the parent changes?

A branch is a point-in-time fork. Later changes on the parent are not propagated, so long-lived branches drift and need to be recreated rather than refreshed if you want current data.

Share

Related pages

More on VerneMQ

More on Xata

Keep looking

Other head to heads