Hasura vs. Others
We benchmarked a Todo application backend built using 4 different platforms/frameworks (maintaining the cost at ~$40 for each) i.e.
- Rails app deployed on DigitalOcean VM ($40 plan)
- Rails app deployed using Heroku (Standard-1X dyno, 10M postgres)
- App built and deployed using Hasura on DigitalOcean VM ($40 plan)
- App built using Firebase (Blaze plan)
| BARE VM | HEROKU | HASURA | FIREBASE | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BaaS ( Backend as a Service ) components |
|||||
| In-built APIs | No BaaS | No BaaS | Auth, Data | Auth, Data (+ realtime) and more | |
| Data APIs power | No BaaS | No BaaS | SQL power, bulk queries | Basic CRUD queries | |
| Throughput | ~60req/s | ~60req/s | ~250req/s | ~80req/s | |
| Lines of code | 200 (source: rails) | 200 (source: rails-heroku) | 30 (source: hasura) | 20 ( source: NA ) | |
| PaaS ( Platform as a Service ) components |
|||||
| One-click Deployment | No PaaS | Yes, using git | Yes, using git or UI | Already hosted | |
| Deploy custom code | No PaaS | Supported technologies | Anything | ||
| Access remote services | No PaaS | Using heroku-cli | Using ssh tunnels | ||
| SSL | No PaaS | Manual | Auto | Auto | |
| Vendor Lock-in | No PaaS | Deployment lock-in | No Lock-in | High lock-in | |
| Provisioning Infra | |||||
| Infra provider | Your choice | Vendor choice | Your choice | Vendor choice | |
| Infra ownership |



