PocketBase vs Windmill
| Tagline | Single-file open-source backend: SQLite database, auth, file storage, realtime | Developer platform to turn scripts into workflows and internal apps |
| Category | Databases & Spreadsheets | Automation & iPaaS |
| Replaces | Airtable, Google Sheets, Retool | Zapier, Make, Retool |
| GitHub stars | 60k | 17k |
| Language | Go | Rust |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 1/5 Effortless | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Manual Docker | Docker Docker Compose Kubernetes Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 8 days ago | 3 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
PocketBase
- SQLite single-file storage is not suitable for high write-concurrency production workloads
- No built-in spreadsheet-style grid view for non-developers; admin UI is developer-focused
- Horizontal scaling requires additional infrastructure; no native clustering support
Windmill
- Code-first approach is more developer-oriented than Zapier's pure no-code experience.
- AGPL plus a separate enterprise edition; some features (distributed workers at scale, SSO, audit) are gated.
- Fewer turnkey SaaS connectors; you often write the integration glue yourself.
- Self-hosting requires Postgres and worker configuration for real workloads.
Bottom line
Choose PocketBase if you want the lower-effort setup; choose PocketBase for the larger community and ecosystem. Windmill has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
PocketBase
Single-file open-source backend: SQLite database, auth, file storage, realtime