Azure Database for PostgreSQL Reviews

We're a managed service provider using Azure Database for PostgreSQL to deliver services to 300 customers, so there are potentially 300 different use cases. We use it as a normal database instead of MySQL or Azure SQL because PostgreSQL performs well, especially with the flexible server. 

We do many things in the cloud with Kubernetes containers, and our customers can use a containerized version of Postgres. We abstract it so that it runs in Azure itself instead of being part of the Kubernetes cluster. It makes sense to go from Postgres to Postgres.

Our organization's database uptime has improved after implementing Azure Database for PostgreSQL, particularly with the flexible server's redundant configuration capabilities, which allow for failovers and read-only configurations. This results in greater resilience and uptime for end customers.

The most valuable features of Azure Database for PostgreSQL are its networking capabilities, which allow for integration with other Azure services. It's easy to configure with the flexible server we used. The newest iterations of Postgres are easier and easier to upgrade.

Azure Database for PostgreSQL can be improved by allowing quicker scaling without blips. It would help if it were more dynamic and required less planning. You can't just scale back performance and storage as needed. Adding flexible scaling capabilities would enhance performance, making it greener and more efficient.  Additionally, addressing the reliability issue where the database might crash during sudden performance peaks would be beneficial.

Azure PostgreSQL's monitoring and management tools are constantly improving, but costs can be challenging. Azure Monitor provides the default metrics, but if you want all the metrics, you need to enable all logging, which will have more cloud costs than the database itself. 

I have been using Azure Database for PostgreSQL for a couple of years.

There is a stability issue where, if the database usage peaks quickly, it may crash and require intervention to restore functionality. It does not auto-heal or self-heal in such situations.

Previously, we used PostgreSQL running in a container on a different platform, not on-premises.

Sometimes, we use Azure technologies for migration, and other times, we use customer technologies. The migration process did not require support from Microsoft.

Azure Database for PostgreSQL has reduced our total ownership cost, but I can't provide the exact figure because it varies among customers. Overall, PostgreSQL is cheaper and more efficient. It offers at least 25 percent cost savings compared to maintaining on-premises databases.

The pricing experience is positive. Azure Database for PostgreSQL reduces the need for hardware investments, and the pay-as-you-go pricing model positively affects database-related costs by allowing us to start small and scale as needed.

I would rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL an eight out of 10. Its scaling capabilities could be improved, and ensuring reliability during sudden usage spikes is needed.

Our primary use cases of PostgreSQL are migrations for our customers. We specialize in Oracle to Postgres migrations. We offer customers the potential advantages and cost savings of migrating to Postgres.

Postgres has helped us innovate and stay competitive. It has dramatically reduced our application development time, improving our efficiency by about 40 percent. It has cut costs by about 60 percent compared to on-premises applications. 

The effective integration of Postgres with Microsoft products, especially with the inclusion of AI features in Azure AI, is significant for our applications. Postgres is not just a database but includes robust AI features that aid in innovation and competitiveness. PostgreSQL's seamless integration with other Azure services and ability to handle numerous integrations seamlessly has been very beneficial. 

Performance is one area that has constraints for our customers. I believe there could be improvements in the mirroring part and Change Data Capture (CDC).

I have used Azure Database for PostgreSQL for two years.

We are monitoring database uptime following the implementation.

Additionally, the scaling options with FlexServer provide us with the flexibility we need based on application complexity.

We do provide feedback to the Microsoft community, and regular communication with their engineering team allows us to gain insights and evaluate our tools.

Positive

We previously used on-premises Oracle and SQL databases. We moved from Oracle to Postgres due to the latter's feature set and open-source advantages.

We have a dedicated development team focused on enhancing our in-house migration product by gathering feedback and insights from Microsoft.

There is a 40 percent increase in efficiency, resulting in enhanced ROI.

The pay-as-you-go pricing model has significantly lowered our database-related costs. We've reduced costs by 60 percent compared to maintaining on-premises solutions.

I would rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL eight on a scale of 10.

We have turned on pgvector, which is an extension for the vector search. We use PostgreSQL as the RAG database for the Gen AI application.

We use it as a RAG database. It coordinates our chunks and connects them with the embedded model to organize them into high-dimensional space. The performance of our RAG application is very good. We have 96% satisfaction.

It facilitates AI technology adoption by coordinating chunks and connecting them with the embedded model.

We are a bank. Our information is mainly stored in a SQL database. Azure Database for PostgreSQL offers a way for our colleagues to quickly understand vector search by using the combination of RDB and the vector search extension. This means we do not have to learn vector databases at the beginning. We can just turn on the extension, and it has the vector search right away.

It helps us to retrieve the context. I use it a lot. It is easy to execute an SQL query.

It offers an easy vector search, which is helpful, but does not offer knowledge graph functionalities.

It is easy to use and optimize. It is very easy for us to understand how a chopped chunk can be translated into embedding. We can put some additional value into the chunk itself.

They can offer more RAG extensions. Currently, it only has the vector search. 

It does not presently support knowledge graph functionalities as Neo4j does. It also does not offer some tools to improve indexing the way other vector databases offer.

We have been using it for a year.

The stability seems fine. We have not noticed any issues. We have generative AI applications, and we have not noticed any latency.

It scales well with the workload.

We handle most implementations in-house, without extensive reliance on Microsoft's technical support.

Neutral

We previously used an on-premise PostgreSQL database. Azure Database for PostgreSQL provides a console to monitor PostgreSQL.

We are now considering using Neo4j in parallel for its knowledge graph capabilities.

We do not pay for a full-year subscription because our usage is still at the beginning phase and not much. The pay-as-you-go model works well for us.

I would rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL an eight out of ten.

At a prior agency, we used the solution primarily for reporting, incident situation awareness, and providing public information regarding different safety programs. It's used for general information sharing within the public domain, and it is nothing too complicated or in-depth.

We don't need to worry about maintenance or updating servers. My use case is querying the data, so it doesn't affect me much. It's a lot easier to leverage other Microsoft technologies outside of our network.

Azure Database has become easier to use over time. Initially, there were many limitations, especially concerning permissions, but now it is straightforward to create a database by clicking a few buttons and ensuring security and user authentication. 

In terms of integration, we already have SharePoint online, and we're starting to explore PowerApps and PowerFlow. It's all seamless. The ease of integrating PostgresSQL and licensing purposes plays a significant role, making it a comfortable choice for the organization.

Perhaps a minor improvement could be made in simplifying user additions, allowing for an easier process rather than scripting it out. However, scripting is not a significant issue.

I have been using SQL on Azure for about 10 years.

Overall, I have not encountered any real latency issues or stability concerns since we do not push SQL on Azure to its limits; our internal database handles more complex applications.

From the limited use cases I've encountered, SQL on Azure is pretty scalable, and I have not faced any issues.

Microsoft's expertise or customer service is really a non-factor, because connecting to another type of database system is possible if needed. However, the organization's comfort with Microsoft's practical solutions keeps us with them.

Positive

Previously, I used databases like MySQL, but the organization's decision to go with Microsoft products was based on the ease of integration and their comfort in working with the company.

There were some initial challenges with authentication during migration, but it's much easier now to integrate with our existing systems.

The solution has helped us reduce our organization's total cost of ownership a little bit, but I can see it decreasing more in the future, given how everything is moving into the cloud.

I'm not familiar with the licensing aspect, as I do not handle it. However, pricing, licensing, and setup costs are not major issues.

I rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL nine out of 10. 

I use it as a relational database in a couple of our products as the back-end relational solution.

Backups are easy, resizing is quick, and the query analyzers help me find out what's happening in each of the queries. Those are the good features.

Support can certainly get better. I have had mixed experiences a lot of times. About 18 months ago, I had a fairly troublesome time with support. After raising multiple escalations, I think it has gotten a little better.

I have used it for maybe five years.

It is pretty stable.

Resizing and other tasks are easy.

Support at best is a five out of ten.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward.

We use software to provision. We do not provision from the console. Basically, we fire a pipeline and get it done.

The ROI aspect is fine. I don't see any issue there.

The rating would probably be a seven out of ten. I am not a reseller for Azure. One of our other group companies is. 

I am an administrator and infrastructure guy, using PostgreSQL as our database for various applications like ControlM and some homegrown applications. It's used internally for other teams.

PostgreSQL was chosen because it can reside locally on the same server, removing the need to involve a database team. It is also self-maintained, which is a significant advantage. We use PostgreSQL to speed up application development. Our applications are ready sooner because we don't need to depend on other database teams.

PostgreSQL is extremely easy to use and does not require a deep understanding of databases to manage.

There aren't any notable areas for improvement that I could see. PostgreSQL was self-sufficient with no need for additional database knowledge to maintain it.

I have used PostgreSQL for years.

The stability of PostgreSQL posed no problem. Latency was not an issue due to the local deployment.

We were able to scale workloads without significant problems.

The initial setup was straightforward as PostgreSQL was installed locally with no need for migration.

The implementation was done by our team without involving external teams.

We've reduced our total ownership cost because we are not spending on expensive SQL server licenses. I also don't need to purchase licenses for the other teams because I can do it myself. 

I like PostgreSQL's pay-as-you-go pricing because I only pay for what I use. However, it depends on the use case. If the application is in high demand, I'd rather go for a fixed license. I'm using it sparsely, I prefer pay-as-you-go.

I rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL 10 out of 10. It's a great product that does not require you to be a DB admin to manage successfully.

We are using Microsoft Azure Database for PostgreSQL as a backend solution and middleware. We utilize it for API gateway solutions, hosting solutions, database solutions, and security solutions. 

Additionally, we are using it as part of our AI solutions.

The operational efficiency of Azure Database for PostgreSQL is good. The cost and benefits ratio is affordable for us. We also use OpenAI services, and everything is affordable for us. We use PostgreSQL for our backend solutions, and security and hosting solutions. 

Overall, we are satisfied with Microsoft solutions and recommend them.

In the future, I would like to see anomaly detection. Currently, when I encounter errors with business rules, I want to know about them quickly. For example, receiving an email when a rule occurs in the database would be beneficial. I am using another solution for this.

I have been using Azure Database for PostgreSQL for five years.

Azure Database for PostgreSQL is stable, and I do not face any issues with it.

I have my own guide, so I do not face any issues with technical support for PostgreSQL.

Neutral

I am not using Cosmos DB. I switched to using PostgreSQL.

Pricing is affordable for us. PostgreSQL is good and affordable for our needs.

From one to ten, I would rate Azure Database for PostgreSQL ten out of ten. However, I am not technical, so my perspective may be limited.