The syntax, especially as it is agnostic, is not always 100% transparent. In heavy object management, there should be improvements, and when we have large-scale multitenant environments, the orchestration becomes a bit tedious. But basically, for my use case, it is a tool I recommend 100%. For object management, the problem is the checksum, which has a very strict and sometimes rigid handling. Even if runOnChange is true, helping stored procedures when the code changes, any minor modification or formatting change should be a bit easier. Liquibase flawlessly solves provisioning, maintains consistency between dozens of schemas, has database version controls integrated into Git, has enormous reliability in auditing. However, it lacks native multitenant orchestration, it has a lot of rigidity in checksum management with programmable code, and the use of native SQL within XML does not work entirely well. I give it eight out of ten because it is indispensable and unbeatable for guaranteeing consistency and automatic provisioning in our multitenant architecture. I only deduct a couple of points for the lack of native multitenant orchestration and the occasional rigidity of checksums when modifying MySQL functions.
Lead Devops Engineer at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 5
Jun 30, 2026
I have not found many disadvantages with Liquibase. However, it does not have inbuilt rollback management. You have to take your own backup and restore it if there is any failure. It does not have a feature for rolling back or creating a snapshot of the existing database, so those things must be managed manually. Liquibase could implement rollback compatibility in the future. Additionally, there were checksum errors, and the logs were not reporting properly in Liquibase, so those issues could be fixed.
Liquibase can be improved by helping developers who have never used it before to understand change logs, change sets, contexts, and labels, which takes time. The documentation is good, but there is a gap between reading the docs and actually being confident with it. I would appreciate more sophisticated pipeline analytics out of the box without having to set everything up manually.
I believe the official documentation of Liquibase could be more detailed and comprehensive. Although Liquibase has substantial community support through open source tutorials and Stack Overflow resources where people can find solutions, the documentation could be simpler and more explanatory.
Liquibase could be improved in several ways. Some facilities could be enhanced, and for first-time users, it could be more intuitive rather than overwhelming.
Liquibase can be improved by addressing the issue that changelog files could conflict with Git if they're not modularized properly. While we create one file per feature, rollbacks are not magical and require significant consideration, and large diff operations can also be very slow, affecting performance. We only use MySQL for now, so there's nothing related to any exotic database features, and we're not consuming anything on that side either.
Liquibase is a solution for database change management that automates scripts and integrates with MySQL, MSSQL, and PostgreSQL. It simplifies database syncing, reduces risks, and supports SQL validation while effectively tracking schema updates in DevOps environments.Liquibase offers a robust platform for automating database changes, effectively supporting integration with CI/CD pipelines. Users benefit from its capabilities to manage changesets and changelogs, ensuring controlled rollbacks...
The syntax, especially as it is agnostic, is not always 100% transparent. In heavy object management, there should be improvements, and when we have large-scale multitenant environments, the orchestration becomes a bit tedious. But basically, for my use case, it is a tool I recommend 100%. For object management, the problem is the checksum, which has a very strict and sometimes rigid handling. Even if runOnChange is true, helping stored procedures when the code changes, any minor modification or formatting change should be a bit easier. Liquibase flawlessly solves provisioning, maintains consistency between dozens of schemas, has database version controls integrated into Git, has enormous reliability in auditing. However, it lacks native multitenant orchestration, it has a lot of rigidity in checksum management with programmable code, and the use of native SQL within XML does not work entirely well. I give it eight out of ten because it is indispensable and unbeatable for guaranteeing consistency and automatic provisioning in our multitenant architecture. I only deduct a couple of points for the lack of native multitenant orchestration and the occasional rigidity of checksums when modifying MySQL functions.
I have not found many disadvantages with Liquibase. However, it does not have inbuilt rollback management. You have to take your own backup and restore it if there is any failure. It does not have a feature for rolling back or creating a snapshot of the existing database, so those things must be managed manually. Liquibase could implement rollback compatibility in the future. Additionally, there were checksum errors, and the logs were not reporting properly in Liquibase, so those issues could be fixed.
Liquibase can be improved by helping developers who have never used it before to understand change logs, change sets, contexts, and labels, which takes time. The documentation is good, but there is a gap between reading the docs and actually being confident with it. I would appreciate more sophisticated pipeline analytics out of the box without having to set everything up manually.
I believe the official documentation of Liquibase could be more detailed and comprehensive. Although Liquibase has substantial community support through open source tutorials and Stack Overflow resources where people can find solutions, the documentation could be simpler and more explanatory.
Liquibase could be improved in several ways. Some facilities could be enhanced, and for first-time users, it could be more intuitive rather than overwhelming.
Liquibase can be improved by addressing the issue that changelog files could conflict with Git if they're not modularized properly. While we create one file per feature, rollbacks are not magical and require significant consideration, and large diff operations can also be very slow, affecting performance. We only use MySQL for now, so there's nothing related to any exotic database features, and we're not consuming anything on that side either.
We were not able to delete some of the tables because of a security issue.
I can't think of any features that are lacking. So far, it's been quite a good solution for us. And the vendor continues to enhance the product.