PostgreSQL Reviews

The reliability, performance, and extensive list of features are what I think matter the most in a production environment.

I have never been in an environment where PostgreSQL was not used. It was always used alongside other RDBMS solutions, depending on the specific requirements of each project. In this way, we were always sure that we would get the best out of it.

There are still things missing compared to other RDBMS, for example monitoring is a little behind as there not that many solutions out there. An equivalent of Oracle's RAC and/or flashback logs would be nice to have. There are a lot of steps need to get it back on the right direction with the logical replication and the parallel sequential scans.

What I mean is that despite the fact that there are things missing (like monitoring solutions and/or flashback logs etc.). Lately, there have been some developments that seem promising and set Postgres to a proper path. Two of these developments are the logical replication and the parallel sequential scans, and compared to other RMDBs, some could say that these are long overdue but nevertheless, they are a great addition and will definitely improve the performance/scalability/replication-capabilities of postgres in the current version and in the versions to come.

I've used this solution in an enterprise environment for a little over seven years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

I have never had a problem that was directly caused by PostgreSQL itself. Usually what happens is that a lot of databases are mistreated in the sense that they are misconfigured, or not designed properly, and then blamed for the issues that are happening as a consequence. Apart from some minor bugs that have recently been fixed, I have never had such an issue.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

There is no real customer service. There are forums where the core-committers and other people are usually very willing to help. I have tried posting a couple of issues I have had and I got a lot of feedback that was really helpful.

The initial setup is very easy. However, if you want to go deeper and understand how things work and how you can tune the database under various circumstances, then you need to read a lot of books and gather more and more experience.

I have never tried implementing it with a vendor. I was always part of an in-house team and we never faced any issues that would make us need to use a vendor team.

I am working with other databases, and not exclusively with PostgreSQL. A lot of other RDBMS require you to pay large amounts of money so I would say that you need to carefully plan your projects according to your needs. If there are specific needs that cannot be met with open-source software I can understand this choice, but otherwise I would always place more trust in the open-source software and its community.

I have tried and worked on other solutions such as Oracle and MySQL. I would say that the combination of PostgreSQL's features, plus the reliability and performance it offers in combination with the fact that you don't pay for a license was the reason I chose it.

There are some features missing compared to other RDBMS. The community is always expanding and more and more people use PostgreSQL every day. There are many forums where you can get information from and there are many different ways to contribute.

By using PostgreSQL, it was easy to get all the developers configured and running. With using it as our back-end for data storage, our company isn’t worried about data loss or data integrity, especially with snapshots and WAL. Our company is also able to run reports and do analytics off data in custom tables.

PostgreSQL does a great job with scalability and performance. Since we are using Django/Python – it works great with PostgreSQL as well. The current features that really help us are Full-Text Search, Array Fields, and JSON Fields.

The only thing I would really want/need to improve is pgAdmin3. pgAdmin3 is a nice tool for SQL Admin and Queries. But, I wish it would allow multiple queries to be run and displayed in the output pane.

Also, it would be amazing if Full-Text Search would work on encrypted data, but I don’t know how that would be possible with any kind of speed.

In regard to pgAdmin 3, there are so many times I’m in one window running different queries. In Microsoft SQL Server, you can select and execute multiple queries and they are shown in the output pane as separate sections. In pgAdmin3, I have to open multiple windows and execute separate queries and jump from window to window looking at / comparing results.

For the Search/Encryption, PostgreSQL supports having certain fields encrypted in the database (https://www.postgresql.org/doc...). It also supports Full Text Search (https://www.postgresql.org/doc...). But, if we encrypt the fields where the lexemes are stored, search won’t work. (Some of the lexemes could give too much information if a user got their hands on the table.)

I have used this solution for three years.

Everything we have needed, we’ve been able to find on https://www.postgresql.org/ or StackOverflow.

We had used Microsoft SQL Server in our previous company. But, the licensing terms kept getting more and more onerous. We started looking at PostgreSQL from the reviews and recommendations, especially since it was open source and Amazon RDS started supporting it.

Initial setup was very straightforward. EnterpriseDB has a great graphical installer to help install on our Dev machines (MacBook Pros). And, AWS RDS makes it is very easy to get set up as well. It allows us to spend our time developing, where our expertise is.

Our initial implementation was done in-house. As long as you follow the step-by-step directions, everything worked great. We also have a managed services company that helps manage the PROD/Staging configuration as well.

Pricing/licensing is the reason we went with PostgreSQL. As a startup, every dollar counts and PostgreSQL has enabled to us to have an enterprise solution at a fraction of the cost of Oracle and Microsoft SQL Server.

PostgreSQL is an amazing product. Very easy to implement and there are many libraries to make it easy to use PostgreSQL as a back-end database solution, no matter what coding language you are using.

• Replication which enables us to use it for High Availability.
• The Foreign Data Wrapper means we can integrate it, and provide interoperability with other databases.
• Multi-master Replication helps us to distribute a database geographically without any hassle or performing maintenance for synchronization as this it is all done during the replication process.
• PostgreSQL has a cleanly designed object basis RDBMS, so there are many opportunities to hook/plugin the PostgreSQL to get more functionalities and features.

Before using PostgreSQL, we had a database issue that we were trying to solve with Oracle. However, Oracle is quite expensive and I heard from a colleague that Oracle increases their charges year on year.

There are many places that it could be improved through the provision of more plug-ins and extensions, such as data distribution, load balancing, new data types, indexing and searching, etc. They could also make it easier to access data manually.

PostgreSQL is Open Source Project, it is never ending development process and maintenance. Since 1996 up to now already 20 Years, PostgreSQL has been borne as Open Source, while before it was an academic research. There are already some improvement actually, such as: Load-balancing can be achieved by Multi-master Replication or PostgresXL with real clustering model. Multi-master replication a.k.a Bi-Directional Replication is best implemented in data distribution topology.

There are many solution from that new features. It already a time to go to implement it on High Performance Transaction system, huge system implementation, mission critical system, most of the time, PostgreSQL is implemented in the financial and service industries, including banks, insurance, loan companies etc.

As an Object based Relational Database, there are many opportunity for expansion of PostgreSQL in many ways. We can create another data type, we can create another programming languages for functions. etc. There are limitless opportunity for expansion of PostgreSQL features, and it is already surpassed Oracle, in terms of Performance, Capability and Enterprise Features.

We've been using it since 2003, when it was v7.x

We have had no issues around the deployment.

Usually stability issues are caused by misconfiguration or misuse.

We've been able to scale it for our needs.

Since this is open source it doesn't have its own support. Therefore, my company provides support as a Maintenance Service Provider. We offer 24/7 support as well as the delivery of sophisticated deployment, tuning, consultation, and support of PostgreSQL.

It was straightforward.

We were helped in the implementation by the vendor. You should always let an expert do the implementation as if it is configured incorrectly it can have a big impact on performance.

I would recommend PostgreSQL to anyone who wants to save costs and deploy a reliable enterprise class database server.

In my experience, the data quality and extensibility are valuable.

I'm a data consultant that specializes in PostgreSQL. The combination of it's open community, open source approach and it's unique features make it the perfect platform for solving today's sophisticated data challenges.

Extensibility could be even better as there are still too many things that require programming in C to add to the database. There could also be better object-oriented support. The table inheritance feature is critical to some of my work, and I wish a similar concept existed for other objects.

I've used this solution for 20 years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

I've run systems that averaged 700-800TPS (over 24 hours), with peaks approaching 10,000TPS. That was on a 4TB database.

Postgres will happily scale to very large deployments, and there are now several open source options for horizontal scaleout as well.

There is no customer support, as this is an open source/open community product. That said, the PostgreSQL community is one of the best OSS communities in existence. Questions are answered quickly and professionally. The only thing I think the community could do better is recognizing that not all users are in a position to avoid or fix data anti-patterns.

It's not the simplest database to setup, but it's also not difficult at all. The only challenge is that there are many different packages offered by different OSs i.e. Red Hat/Centos, Debian, FreeBSD, Brew, MacPorts, etc), and they all have slight differences. This can lead to some problems during install, but they're not difficult to fix.

I've used Oracle, DB2, Sybase and MSSQL. The only one that comes close to PostgreSQL is Oracle, and only because of the large set of developer tools it offers. But, it's very difficult to manage and extremely expensive.

Always hire an expert to advise you on production database deployment. Similar to security, mistakes in this area have the potential to seriously impact your business. Postgres is free, but it can be difficult to hire experienced PostgreSQL people. There is a silver lining to that, as if you can find someone with five to 10 years experience then odds are very good and very dedicated to their craft and aren't interested in just punching a clock. You can certainly find those types of people for other products, but relatively speaking they're much rarer.

We use PostgreSQL as a database, e.g. it's where we install the application. We also use it for all types of batch processing, and it also has the batch sequencing engine. We use it for everything, e.g. everything's right there in the database.

What I like most about PostgreSQL is its ease of management.

They should make PostgreSQL more secure. It's stable, but from a security point of view, it still needs improvement.

It's been a few years since I started using PostgreSQL.

PostgreSQL is a stable solution. It's also very easy to manage.

PostgreSQL is scalable.

Installing PostgreSQL was straightforward. There were just a few parameters I needed to get through, then the process became straightforward. I was able to do the installation myself.

I did the implementation of PostgreSQL myself, and did not need a vendor or technical team to help me.

PostgreSQL is for personal use, e.g. I've been using it for my applications. It's deployed on cloud.

I'm not from the core database team, so whatever features are currently provided by this solution, I'm happy with them, e.g. PostgreSQL is fulfilling my needs. Our database administrators will be able to provide more information on areas for improvement for this solution, because they know all the ins and outs of the database. I'm using this for my application, and I have not faced any issues with it.

I'm part of a global company, and in our team, we keep recommending PostgreSQL to our client, but increasing the usage of this solution depends on the client, e.g. the one who pays.

We have more than 200,000 users of PostgreSQL.

In my project, I don't need a technical team for the deployment and maintenance of this solution, e.g. I can do it myself, but for other projects, deployment and maintenance could be handled by database administrators.

On a scale from one to ten, I'll rate PostgreSQL seven out of ten.

Any relational databases that you have in Oracle, you can move to PostgreSQL. This is what we have been doing at the moment. 

I like that you can move any relational database from Oracle to PostgreSQL. I also like that it's pretty stable.

The price could be better.

I have been using PostgreSQL for a few years.

PostgreSQL is quite stable.

We used Oracle before switching to PostgreSQL.

The initial setup and installation didn't take a lot of time. It usually takes about a couple of hours.

I implemented this solution by myself.

It could be much cheaper. If you would like to build an application on Amazon today, PostgreSQL is the standard database with Redshift. If you want other databases, you can add them, but PostgreSQL is the basis of everything. It's a question of money, that's it.

I would recommend it as a choice for people that want to move from Oracle to another database, which is relatively free. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give PostgreSQL an eight.

The solution is quite a good database for light applications for sure. This is how we are using it - as a front-end application and the canned database of PostgreSQL. The use case is comparable to Oracle, with quite a wide range of usage.

It's easy to install in Oracle and it's quite good to use for the canned database for content applications.

The solution is quite a good database.

Their pricing is very good.

The solution is very easy to use.

It's quite scalable.

The stability is good.

The installation is simple. 

I don't work with the solution often enough to really know if there are any missing elements. For me, for how I use it, it works fine.

We're only really using two to five percent of the functionality available.

While there's no perfect solution, we aren't using too much of the functionality to really be able to comment on what might be missing.

If it was free to use, it would be the perfect solution.

We're currently using the solution. We've used it at least over the past year.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

The scalability is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with ease.

We have around 2,000 people using the solution currently. It might even be a bit more.

We also use Oracle Database. I would say the two are quite comparable.

The installation is not overly complex. You just install it and start using it. It's simple. We are using AWS for both instances so it's simple and easy. That said, I was not personally involved in the installation process.

How many people you require for the implementation depends on the implementation itself. It can be one person or it can be five. It's difficult to say. In our case, we have only one person looking after all instances.

It's not an expensive solution.

I can't recall the exact version number of the solution. We're planning to move to the latest version.

The solution is installed in the cloud, however, it's a software as a service, provided by AWS.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's very comparable to Oracle.

While it does depend on the use case, for the most part, I would recommend the solution to other companies and users.

This database is highly reliable and offers excellent disaster recovery. In short, I can depend on it to be available and operational.

As we’ve used this since our founding, I cannot speak to how it has improved any function.

The development team has been teasing me with talk of multi-master capability for some time. Their latest release, 9.5.3, does offer some asynchronous capability, but I really want synchronous multi-mastering as that would allow horizontal scaling with much more capability.

Current bidirectional support is limited to the functions provided by a third party integrator. The extension does not offer real-time update guarantees nor does it support DDL updates (schema changes). This is quite unlike the current unidirectional replication scheme, where DDL updates are processed, and there is a way to guarantee real-time updates so the slave server can function as a hot standby. With BDR (bidirectional replication) this is not possible. I understand that in all respects, true bidirectional replication is the holy grail of databases as would give any server in a cluster the ability to take over as a single master without any transaction loss.

I've used this solution for more than 10 years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

I have in the past before the code base had stabilized. Certain procedures just didn’t operate reliably and some internal parameters were just too small and caused problems with large data tables.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

Well, it’s open source so mileage varies, but generally I haven’t had problems. Of course being open source, I can and have looked through the database source code and found the answers to problems I was experiencing.

I have used MySQL, another open source product now controlled by Oracle. It’s reasonably fast and OK for simple databases, but it lacks transactional isolation and its replication setup does not enforce a true master/slave configuration.

It is rather complex to set up correctly. The configuration file is over 400 lines in length and many parameters have only vaguely defined suggestions. Changing a single parameter can have unintended consequences.

Strictly in-house, and I would say anyone attempting implementation should hire the expertise to get the system correct.

Obviously pricing and licensing is non-existent, but the costs need to include the expense of in-house expertise, either employees or consultants.

PostgreSQL is an enterprise capable database very similar to many commercial offerings, but be prepared to either pay for consulting or a long period or experimentation to get the configuration proper.