Technology
Supabase
Ship faster with Supabase—Postgres-first builds with auth, RLS, edge functions, and real-time patterns that stay maintainable as you grow.
Best For
Ideal use cases
Projects preferring PostgreSQL
Applications needing SQL queries
Teams wanting open-source backend
Projects requiring real-time subscriptions
Applications needing row-level security
What We Build
Projects we deliver
SaaS platforms with multi-tenancy
Web applications with authentication
Real-time dashboards
E-commerce platforms
Content management systems
API backends
Admin panels
Collaboration tools
Ecosystem
Compatible tools & integrations
Seamless Integrations
Works with your existing stack
Use Cases
Recommended use cases
Startup MVPs preferring SQL databases
SaaS platforms needing multi-tenant architecture
Applications requiring complex queries
Projects needing open-source solutions
Web apps with real-time features
Delivery
How we deliver
We structure Supabase apps with proper database schemas and relationships
Implement row-level security policies for data protection
Use Supabase Auth for authentication with social providers
Set up real-time subscriptions for live updates
Optimize queries and use proper indexes
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Supabase uses PostgreSQL (SQL) while Firebase uses Firestore (NoSQL). Supabase is better for complex queries and SQL familiarity. Firebase offers more managed services and is faster for simple setups.
Yes. Supabase is open-source and can be self-hosted. We can set up self-hosted instances for enterprise applications or specific compliance requirements.
We use Supabase migrations for schema changes. We create migration files, test them locally, and apply them to staging and production environments. We also use version control for migrations.
AI
Add AI on top of this stack
Two common AI services that pair well with this technology, plus the evidence-first buyer sprint.
Related
Explore related technologies
Regional
Delivery considerations for your region
Data and risk discovery (Germany)
Privacy, security, residency, and regulatory requirements differ by workflow. We document the applicable data flows, roles, retention needs, and control owners before recommending an architecture.
The resulting proposal lists the controls and evidence that are actually in scope. It is not a generic compliance, certification, or legal-assurance promise.
- Map data sources, destinations, roles, and sensitive fields
- Record access, retention, logging, and deletion requirements
- Identify required security or procurement evidence before contracting
- Use an NDA or DPA only when the parties mutually execute it
Working model (Germany)
Exact live-overlap hours, response expectations, meeting windows, and escalation contacts are confirmed in the proposal for each engagement.
Written decisions, scoped milestones, and asynchronous updates reduce unnecessary meetings without implying an unagreed service level.
- Proposal-specific overlap and meeting windows
- Named owners for decisions and blockers
- Written scope, assumptions, and change decisions
- Milestone cadence agreed before kickoff
Commercial setup (Germany)
The contracting entity, proposal currency, invoicing cadence, payment terms, intellectual-property terms, and required vendor documents are agreed before work begins.
The Opportunity Sprint can establish the evidence needed to scope a production pilot; it does not pre-commit either party to a rollout.
- Contracting entity and currency confirmed in writing
- Milestones and acceptance criteria defined in the proposal
- Vendor-document requirements identified before signature
- Scope changes require an explicit written decision
Delivery controls (Germany)
Testing, observability, release, security, and handover controls are selected for the actual system risk rather than promised as a generic bundle.
Acceptance measures and production responsibilities are recorded before implementation so both teams know what evidence will support release.
- Risk-based testing and acceptance measures
- Release, rollback, and observability responsibilities
- Security controls tied to the agreed threat model
- Handover artifacts defined in the signed scope
Want to scope this properly?
Considering Supabase? Share your requirements and we’ll recommend a clean setup and rollout plan. EUR-based engagements.
We’ll review the context and reply with a practical next step.