Learn how QuestDB and TDengine differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these time series databases is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
6 hours agoRepository age
13 yearsVersion
10.1.0License
Apache-2.0Repository
questdb/questdb
Last 30 days
Last commit
2 days agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
3.4.3.9License
AGPL-3.0Repository
taosdata/tdengine
QuestDB appears to have several advantages over TDengine, particularly in growth and maturity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both tools have similar popularity levels, with QuestDB having 17,513 stars and TDengine having 25,189 stars on GitHub. In terms of developer contributions, TDengine has 5,014 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
QuestDB is growing faster, adding 76 stars in the last 30 days (+0.4%) against adding 37 stars for TDengine (+0.1%). QuestDB is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with QuestDB last updated 6 hours ago and TDengine 2 days ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Python, Golang, Rust, C, Objective-C, PHP, Java, C++, C#. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: TDengine leverages CSS, MATLAB, Lua, R, Ada.
QuestDB has been in development longer, starting 13 years ago, compared to TDengine which began 7 years ago. This 5.3-year head start suggests QuestDB may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: QuestDB is licensed under Apache-2.0 while TDengine uses AGPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Time Series Databases.