SQLite vs CockroachDB for Solo Developers

Quick Comparison

SQLite Overview

SQLite is the database that doesn't get in your way. No installation, no configuration, no account creation. Import the library, open a file, and you have a relational database with full SQL support. Your entire database lives in one file that you can copy, move, back up, or even commit to version control. Nothing in the database world is simpler.

For solo developers, simplicity translates to shipping speed. I've started projects, built features, and deployed them using SQLite without ever thinking about the database. It just works. No Docker container to manage, no cloud dashboard to navigate, no connection string to debug. The database is a file, and the file is on your disk.

Performance often surprises people. SQLite runs inside your application process, so reads skip the network entirely. With WAL mode and proper indexing, it handles thousands of reads per second easily. Write throughput is limited to one writer at a time, but for most web applications, that's sufficient. Production services like Expensify, Pieter Levels' applications, and countless embedded systems prove SQLite works at real scale.

CockroachDB Overview

CockroachDB is a distributed SQL database designed for applications that need to survive data center failures, serve users across multiple continents, and maintain consistency across distributed nodes. It speaks PostgreSQL wire protocol, shards data automatically, and provides serializable isolation (the strongest consistency guarantee available).

The Serverless free tier offers 10GB storage and 50M request units per month. You connect with standard PostgreSQL tools and ORMs, write standard SQL, and CockroachDB handles distribution behind the scenes. For experimentation, the free tier works. For production workloads, the Dedicated plan starts at $295/month.

CockroachDB solves the hard problems of distributed databases: consensus across nodes, automatic rebalancing, multi-region transactions, and surviving node failures without data loss. These are important problems. They're just not problems that most solo developers face.

Key Differences

They exist at opposite ends of the complexity spectrum. SQLite is the simplest possible database. CockroachDB is one of the most complex. SQLite runs in a single process on a single machine. CockroachDB distributes data across multiple nodes, regions, and continents. The simplicity gap between these two tools is enormous.

Target audience. SQLite is built for embedded use, single-server applications, and scenarios where simplicity matters most. CockroachDB is built for enterprises that need distributed, fault-tolerant, globally consistent databases. Solo developers fall firmly in SQLite's target audience.

Setup time. SQLite: zero. Import the library and open a file. CockroachDB Serverless: sign up, create a cluster, get credentials, configure connection strings. CockroachDB self-hosted: install the binary, initialize the cluster, configure nodes, set up certificates. The gap in setup complexity is massive.

Cost. SQLite costs nothing. CockroachDB has a free tier for experimentation, but production use starts at $295/month for dedicated clusters. Even the serverless tier eventually costs money as usage grows. For solo developers, the price difference is not trivial.

Write concurrency. SQLite allows one writer at a time. CockroachDB handles concurrent writes across distributed nodes. This is CockroachDB's strength. But for solo developer workloads (tens to hundreds of concurrent users), SQLite's write throughput is rarely the bottleneck.

Fault tolerance. CockroachDB survives node failures, data center outages, and regional disasters without data loss or downtime. SQLite on a single server has a single point of failure. If your server goes down, your database goes down. For solo developers, the practical answer is backups and redundancy (Litestream, regular snapshots), not distributed databases.

SQL compatibility. CockroachDB speaks PostgreSQL dialect. SQLite has its own dialect with quirks (dynamic typing, limited ALTER TABLE). If you need PostgreSQL compatibility for your ORM or tools, CockroachDB provides it. But so does plain PostgreSQL, Neon, or Supabase, at a fraction of the cost and complexity.

Operational complexity. SQLite has no operational concerns. No tuning, no monitoring, no upgrades to coordinate. CockroachDB has significant operational complexity even in its managed form: understanding consistency models, planning topology, monitoring cluster health, and managing costs based on request units.

When to Choose SQLite

• You want the simplest database setup possible
• Zero cost matters for your project's budget
• Single-server deployment handles your needs
• Desktop apps, mobile apps, or CLI tools need an embedded database
• Prototyping speed is a priority
• You value simplicity over distributed system guarantees

When to Choose CockroachDB

• Your application genuinely requires multi-region data consistency
• Surviving regional outages without downtime is a business requirement
• You need distributed SQL at massive scale with strong consistency
• Enterprise compliance mandates geographic data distribution
• You have significant budget and technical resources for a distributed database

The Verdict

For solo developers, this comparison isn't close. SQLite wins decisively.

The 9/10 versus 4/10 ratings reflect the reality that CockroachDB solves problems solo developers don't have. Multi-region consistency, automatic sharding, and distributed transactions are enterprise features for enterprise teams with enterprise budgets. CockroachDB is impressive technology, but recommending it to a solo developer would be like recommending a commercial truck to someone who needs a bicycle.

SQLite handles the workload of most solo developer projects effortlessly. Zero cost, zero configuration, and performance that exceeds expectations. When you need more than SQLite provides (concurrent writes, PostgreSQL compatibility, scaling beyond one server), the natural upgrade path is PostgreSQL through Neon or Supabase, not CockroachDB.

CockroachDB becomes relevant when your application serves millions of users across multiple continents and absolutely cannot tolerate data inconsistency or regional outages. If you reach that point, congratulations. You've outgrown the solo developer category entirely. Until then, SQLite is the practical, pragmatic choice.

Start simple. Ship fast. Upgrade when real constraints demand it, not when theoretical scaling concerns suggest it. That's the solo developer way, and SQLite embodies it perfectly.