The short version
Choose NocoDB if you must run the software yourself, or want a spreadsheet view of a Postgres or MySQL database you already have. CodeKasten can do neither today.
Choose CodeKasten if agents will change data that matters, and you want those changes on a branch a person reviews, with a way back afterwards.
We make CodeKasten, so read this with that in mind. Everything said about NocoDB comes from its own pages, read on 31 October 2026, and links to them. Tell us if something has changed.
Side by side
| NocoDB | CodeKasten | |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Cloud, or self-hosted for free | Hosted only |
| Licence | Fair-code (Community edition) | Closed source |
| Your existing database | Connect Postgres or MySQL | No: records live in CodeKasten |
| Records | Unlimited self-hosted; 1,000 to 1 million on cloud plans | 1,000 to 500,000 a branch |
| An MCP server for agents | Yes, about 200 tools; record tools only in Community | Yes |
| What an agent may do | Per project and section: read, write, delete | A grant narrowed from a key: types, branches, verbs |
| Where an agent's edits land | In the table | On its own branch; main is closed to agents |
| Trying a change away from live data | Base sandbox is listed as "soon" on the pricing page | A branch on every plan: records, types, views and workflows |
| Reviewing changes | Revision history per record, read-only | A commit lists every record, field by field |
| Undoing a change | A snapshot restores to a new base | Revert the commit, in place |
| Price a seat a month, billed yearly | $12 Plus, $24 Business, $45 Scale | $12 Team, $29 Business, listed: no payment is taken yet |
Where an agent's changes land
NocoDB's MCP server is broad and well thought out. You choose the projects a client can reach and a level for each section, and its calls go through the same service, permissions and audit as the REST API. Every section starts at Read, write & delete, so its docs suggest lowering that for clients that should not delete.
Those are controls on what a call may do. Once it is allowed, the row has changed. NocoDB's pricing page lists a base sandbox as coming soon, a private clone for rebuilding the schema and publishing it back, which may change this comparison for structure.
In CodeKasten an agent always works on its own branch, and a person merges. See AI agent guardrails.
Taking a change back
NocoDB shows a read-only revision history on each record, for 3 days to a year or more by plan. Snapshots restore into a new base and leave out audit data and revision history. On a database you connected yourself, your database's own backups can do more.
In CodeKasten a change to 1,200 records is one commit. You read it as a whole, and reverting it is one action:
Where NocoDB is the better choice
- Self-hosting. It is free to run yourself, with unlimited records, and it can run air-gapped on Enterprise. CodeKasten has no self-hosted version.
- Your data stays in your database. Connect a database you already run, and other software can keep using it.
- Finer access. Its MCP tools manage table and field permissions and row-level security. CodeKasten sets access per workspace and per branch.
- Scale on the top plans: 1 million records on Scale, and no limit on Enterprise.
- Moving in. CodeKasten has no importer from NocoDB yet. An agent can copy your data over through MCP, but you would be doing that work.
Where CodeKasten is the better choice
- Bulk changes by agents, reviewed as a whole before they count.
- Version control for the data itself: a branch holds records, types, views and workflows, and merges stop at each conflict.
- Knowing who acted: each agent has its own identity on every record and commit, shown as "Claude, for Maria".
- Effects outside your data: an agent's workflow can't send a message until the merge.
- Offline on Android: the app keeps your workspace on the phone, changes included.