Repo Compare › Analytics databases

ClickHouse vs TimescaleDB vs QuestDB

A side-by-side look at how actively ClickHouse, TimescaleDB and QuestDB are developed on GitHub — popularity, contributor base, commit activity and how quickly issues and pull requests move.

What the numbers say

Head-to-head

Snapshot taken 30 September 2026.

MetricClickHouse
Slowing
TimescaleDB
Active
QuestDB
Active
Stars50k24k17k
Forks9.0k1.2k1.7k
Contributors3.3k141186
Commits, last 52 weeks99k1.2k861
Open issues5.5k357805
Open pull requests2.6k52184
Closed / merged PRs87k7.1k4.9k
Watchers696311139
Last push30 Sep 202630 Sep 202630 Sep 2026
Latest releasev26.9.6.6-stable (Sep 2026)2.30.2 (Sep 2026)10.0.1 (Aug 2026)
Main languageC++CJava
LicenceApache-2.0Not detected by GitHubApache-2.0
CreatedJun 2016Mar 2017Apr 2014

The wide bar is that repository’s share of the largest value in its own row — half the length means half the number. The thin gauge beneath it is the same row rescaled from its smallest value to its largest, which makes a close gap such as 61k against 59k visible; on that gauge the row’s lowest value always sits at zero however big it is, so read it as a spread and never as a quantity. Bars compare repositories with each other and never one metric against another. Colour identifies the repository, matching the dot beside its name. On the two issue rows a longer bar means more open work, which is usually the opposite of better. The highlighted cell is the highest value in a row. “Active / Slowing / Dormant” is a simple heuristic from how recently code was pushed and open issues per star — a starting point, not a verdict. Stars measure popularity, not quality.

Open these in the live comparer →

Related comparisons