Comparison
tinbase vs PocketBase
Both are single-binary, batteries-included backends with no Docker. The real question is SQLite and PocketBase’s own API versus Postgres and the Supabase ecosystem, weighed against PocketBase being lighter and production-ready today.
At a glance
tinbase
Single-binary Postgres, wire-compatible with Supabase.
PocketBase
The lightest single-binary backend, on SQLite, production-ready.
Feature by feature
tinbase vs PocketBase, compared
Colour is a hint, not a verdict: green marks a tinbase strength, amber an area where it is still catching up. Footprint figures come from the reproducible benchmarks.
| tinbase | PocketBase | |
|---|---|---|
| License | MIT, open source | MIT, open source |
| Runtime | Node, or standalone binary | Go, standalone binary |
| Database | Real Postgres 17 | SQLite |
| Postgres features (RLS, jsonb, FKs, triggers) | Yes | SQLite equivalents only |
| Client SDK | supabase-js | PocketBase SDK (JS / Dart) |
| Single binary | Yes, ~58 MB | Yes, ~30 MB |
| Memory under load | ~66 MB (binary) | ~24 MB |
| Runs in the browser / embedded | Yes (PGlite / pg-mem) | No, server only |
| Realtime | postgres_changes, broadcast, presence + RLS | Realtime subscriptions |
| Auth | Email, OAuth, magic link, MFA/TOTP | Email, OAuth, OTP |
| Storage | S3-style, RLS, signed URLs, TUS | File storage, S3 backend |
| Admin dashboard | Studio (Supabase-style) at /_/ | Built-in admin UI |
| Access control | Postgres RLS (SQL policies) | Collection API rules |
| Extensibility | SQL, Edge Functions, webhooks, cron | Go extensions / JS hooks |
| Ecosystem portability | supabase-js + migrations portable to Supabase | PocketBase-specific |
| Production maturity | Alpha | Production-ready, mature |
Which should you choose?
Choose tinbase if
- You want real Postgres semantics (RLS, jsonb, FKs, triggers), not SQLite
- You want the Supabase SDK and migrations that stay portable to hosted Supabase
- You need the backend to run in a browser tab or embedded, not just as a server
- Per-request Row Level Security in SQL matters to you
Choose PocketBase if
- You want the absolute lightest footprint (~24 MB under load)
- You are shipping to production now and want a mature, proven backend
- SQLite fits your workload and you like extending the backend in Go
- A single self-contained file with the smallest possible surface is the priority
Keep exploring
PocketBase alternativeWhy tinbase works as a PocketBase alternative, and the migration path.tinbase vs SupabaseThe full managed production platform, cloud-hosted and battle-tested.tinbase vs FirebaseA mature, managed, mobile-first NoSQL cloud at global scale.tinbase vs AppwriteA mature multi-SDK platform, self-hosted via Docker.
Frequently asked questions
- How is tinbase different from PocketBase?
- Both are single-binary, Docker-free backends. PocketBase uses SQLite and its own SDK and API rules. tinbase runs real Postgres (RLS, jsonb, foreign keys, triggers) behind Supabase’s wire protocols, so you use supabase-js and keep migrations portable to hosted Supabase. PocketBase is lighter and production-ready; tinbase is alpha.
- Is tinbase as lightweight as PocketBase?
- Close, but PocketBase is lighter. PocketBase runs at about 24 MB of RAM under load; the tinbase single binary is about 66 MB. tinbase trades that extra footprint for a full Postgres engine and Supabase-compatible APIs.
- Does tinbase have an admin UI like PocketBase?
- Yes. tinbase ships Studio, a Supabase-Studio-style dashboard, at /_/. It includes a table editor, SQL editor, auth and RLS management, storage, and logs, and it compiles into the single binary.
- Can I use Postgres features PocketBase’s SQLite lacks?
- Yes. Because tinbase is real Postgres, you get jsonb, foreign keys, triggers, PL/pgSQL, Row Level Security, and the wider Postgres extension surface, all through the standard supabase-js client.
Try it in one command
No Docker, no sign-up. Point the supabase-js SDK you already know at a real Postgres backend running in a single process.
npx tinbase start