PostgreSQL Reviews

We primarily use the solution for management. We have a managed ERP solution, however, it's all in-house.

The ease of use has been a great benefit for us in the organization.

The solution is very easy to use.

The database has excellent performance.

It's easy to audit the database. When the user makes some changes to the database, it's easy to audit the changes. It's fairly easy to manage.

The human resources, the HR, within the system needs improvement.

The user interface could be a bit better. 

Just the basic functionality could be improved overall.

I've been using the solution for two years at this point.

The stability is very good. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's not buggy and it seems to be glitch-free. It's good.

Really, I didn't have any problems with scalability. If a company needs to expand it, they can do so.

We only have developers that use the solution. 

We don't plan to increase usage in the future.

We don't use technical support, and therefore I can't really evaluate them. I have no idea if they are knowledgeable and responsive.

They do have documentation and manuals that are okay. They're pretty helpful.

The company used a Microsoft SQL Server previously. I don't know what the reasons were for changing, however, due to the fact that, when I arrived at the business, they already had Postgre.

I don't have any experience with the implementation. I didn't handle the process personally.

I'm unsure as to how long deployment takes.

You don't need too much staff for maintenance. We have one person that handles it.

It's my understanding that the solution was handed in-hours. We didn't use an integrator, reseller, or a consultant for the deployment.

I'm not sure what the licensing costs for the solution are.

I believe we are on version nine of the solution. It's one of the latest versions.

I'd advise new users to maybe be aware of the syntax of the sentences of PostgreSQL due to the fact that it's a little different than SQL or Oracle.

Overall, I'd rate the solution an eight out of ten. So far, we've been using it and we haven't had any problems.

I am using it to gain knowledge of the product, as I am an implementation engineer. Some clients are public organizations, migrating from Oracle to PostgreSQL.

We use it daily.

The most valuable features are:

• The price
• Stability 
• It is scalable and is used by our clients in small business environments
• It is a simple product to use.
  

The user interface for the clients could be easier to use as they are small businesses.
From a technical support perspective, the documentation could be improved. The simplicity and availability of documentation and transparency need a little improvement. The product also needs more service support. However, there is a good online community that can help to quickly find a solution.

I have been using PostgreSQL for one year.

The product is very stable.

The setup of PostgreSQL is straightforward.

We use an in-house team.

I would rate PostgreSQL a ten out of ten. 

We use PostgreSQL for most part of our mission critical applications.

The solution has a very robust backup and recovery integration, and has good ANSI SQL language.

We are considering migrating to this platform due to its robust backup and recovery solution, among many other features.

• Robust backup and recovery integration.
• Follows ANSI SQL.
• opensource
• easy to integrate with applications and high level programming languages such as; python, ruby, java, C, perl, php...

• Possibility to use query routers on sharded clusters.
• Remove the limitations of how many changes one can have on the databases before it requires to reset all blocks, which are very painful.

No issues.

Yes, as the database grows, one has to perform a full vacuum in order to continue to work on the database.

Another issue is that the "archive_command"s are executed in sequence, instead of in parallel, and as the WAL size is fixed to 16MB, and it is not possible to change in a configuration file, this will have a huge impact of protecting the WAL logs to a backup system.

Customer Service:

10 out of 10.

Technical Support:

10 out of 10.

We switch to this solution due to its stability and that it is open source.

The initial setup is simple.

We implemented it in-house.

The software is free, and very easy to find for skilled people.

Use backup software that integrates with the solution.

We selected "DB Protection for PostgreSQL", which has some nice features to perform block level incremental forever using IBM Spectrum Protect.

Yes, we reviewed MongoDB, MariaDB, and MySQL.

The new JSON data type that allows to use some NoSQL-like functionality.

This is great because brings some of the most valuable features of NoSQL databases to relational databases. You can have a column with JSON datatype and then query that JSON inside your regular SQL queries. 

So basically, you are mixing together the relational and NoSQL world in just one database, one powerful solution. 

We use it as main database for our SaaS product.

Scalability;

Although PostgreSQL is known for handling very well large amounts of workload, NoSQL databases performs better when scaling. NoSQL databases were built with scalability in mind, so it´s a natural advantage. 

PostgreSQL must keep improving their scalability and ability to work in HA (high availability).

I've used this solution for four years. 

No. 

See answer to 'Room for Improvement' question. 

We had several performance issues with MySQL.

Yes, MySQL.

Explore all the features.

It works great out-of-the-box and it opens up many opportunities in project development.

I first install the regular version. I only configure complex things when they are needed.

I think that the product fully meets the needs of modern development. If there is something missing in it, then it is probably a too narrow profile function.

I've used this solution for two years.

There were no issues with stability.

There were no issues with scalability.

I would rate the technical documentation as an eight out of 10. I never spoke with the support team.

I used MySQL. I switched because at that time, because some things were complicated with MySQL. For example: scaling, sparse data JSON, and other issues.

Both projects have the same query syntax, and the transition for me was almost painless.

The setup was easy.

As far as I know, there are no problems with the license for free use.

I explored many different databases: Redis, MongoDB, MySQL, Elasticsearch, and others.

I use some of them in conjunction with PostgreSQL. However, if we are talking about relational databases, then I only use MySQL.

I think this is the only decent solution for a relational database in web development.

PostgreSQL is an open source database, so there is no associated licensing cost for the software and we always have a new version easily available. It runs on all major operating systems, although I have always used it on UNIX platforms.

It also supports storage of binary large objects, including pictures, sounds, or video. It is highly scalable, both in the sheer quantity of data it can manage and in the number of concurrent users it can accommodate.

PostgreSQL runs stored procedures in a lot of programming languages (Java, Perl, C/C++, etc.). It includes many built-in functions from basic math and string operations to cryptography and Oracle compatibility. Triggers and stored procedures can be written in C and loaded into the database as a library. PostgreSQL uses a multiple row data storage strategy called MVCC to make PostgreSQL extremely responsive in high volume environments. Allow hot backups.

I have worked at the Ministry of Economy in the IT area, for more than 20 years ago. Since then, the main developments have always used PostgreSQL for their robustness, reliability, stability, and conformity with the standard SQL.

I have noticed that it consumes a lot of resources. I would improve this aspect.

We had no issues. PostgreSQL statistically does not suffer falls, it simply works.

We had no issues. We had to modify some configurations but the impact was almost transparent.

All the obstacles that we encounter are solved with information obtained on websites. PostgreSQL has a community of thousands of users and professionals who contribute their experience, so I always have found a solution for all my issues.

I have used other solutions for over 20 years and the problem of licensing has been our biggest drawback because of the costs and dependence we require from the provider.

It is extremely simple. In addition, we have several databases in production so we always start with a configuration model already tested and reliable.

I recommend PostgreSQL without doubt because my experience of almost 20 years with this product has shown me that PostgreSQL has certain features that make it highly reliable: high scalability, robustness, available for multiple platforms, extensible with little effort and without additional cost, designed for high volume environments, easy to manage and extensive online support.

I recommend everyone to get into the PostgreSQL world, with no licensing costs. PostgreSQL uses a flexible and business-friendly license because it does not restrict the use of PostgreSQL with commercial and proprietary applications. Those who choose PostgreSQL forget the dependency on a provider, the price of the licenses and the changes in the license conditions.

We got carried away by the experience of a team member with experience in PostgreSQL and first we used the tool in applications of low concurrency of users but with storage of files pdf, doc and xls in the tables. We were surprised by the results. This is how we trust in PostgreSQL and we demand more and more. We always get good results. Sometimes we have had to migrate to a new version of PostgreSQL, but have done so without any problem(s).

• Integration with various programming languages
• Partial indexes
• Online backups/recovery
• Replication
• Hot standby
• Cascading replication
• Partitioning
• Performance

This is an open-source product with advanced features that support OLTP/OLAP applications with the following benefits that helps organizations grow:

• No recurring licensing cost
• Huge cost savings forever
• No vendor lock in
• One-time migration cost
• Yearly major releases
• Increase in profit margins
• Completely open source
• Community-based FREE support available
• Commercial support option

The product has room for improvement with horizontal scalability and multi-master replication options, where community work is already in progress. These features will greatly benefit customers by balancing the load between servers, resulting in great performance improvement, scalability and high availability at a fraction of the cost.

I have used it for more than 10 years.

Over the last 10 years, I have used it to handle terabytes of data supporting OLTP applications and have hardly come across any stability or scalability issues with PostgreSQL.

My company, Shreeyansh, provides high-quality, 24X7 database services along with a commercial support option. We scale our services 9/10. Customers can opt for community-based support as well.

Customers may have straightforward or complex environments. However, it's totally based on the technology in use and the amount of money spent for running their business applications.

We have special expertise in providing various database solutions to our global customers and we implement customer solutions with help of our in-house DBAs.

PostgreSQL is written in ANCI C, fulfilling all of the ACID properties other proprietary databases support. Most of the customers who use proprietary database solutions to their business applications prefer to move away from proprietary licensed databases to open-source databases to save huge amounts of recurring licensing costs resulting in huge profit margins. Customer choose PostgreSQL for its rich feature list, open source, no recurring software licensing costs, no vendor lock-in and various choices for the best commercial support and community-based support available.

I strongly recommend this product, with no recurring licensing liabilities with community support and with optional commercial support available. Shreeyansh Technologies provides various quality database services in 24X7 model to support our global customers.

• Free and open-source RDBMS, with a permissive license
• ACID compliance
• Multi-version concurrency control
• Custom data types
• Array data types
• PL/Python stored procedures

Back in the day, MySQL had storage problems with InnoDB (everything in a single file), and we wanted ACID compliance. So we decided to use PostgreSQL for that, and it helped us achieve that goal. PostgreSQL's feature set was excellent for our needs, and we didn't want an expensive (meaning hardware utilization) RDBMS. Fit like a glove.

There's always room for improvement. Better SELECT performance is something that PostgreSQL could really benefit from. Replication should also be made easier. PostgreSQL also lacks a good tool like MySQL Workbench. PgAdmin3 works, but it's funky and crashes sometimes.

We've been using PostgreSQL in production since version 8.4, in 2010.

I have not encountered any deployment, stability or scalability issues. It's been running since version 8.4, updating one version at a time (9.0, then 9.1 until 9.4). Database is currently at 6GB, works without a hitch.

I have never used or never needed technical support. StackOverflow covered all our needs on this scenario.

Up to that point, we used MySQL. The decision to change came with a new version being written from scratch, and PostgreSQL being better suited for our needs.

The initial setup was somewhat complex. We had to import the old database, which was in MySQL. Most tables were rewritten, and the team was not used to PostgreSQL at that time, so there was a small cultural impact.

Implementation was completely in-house. On our case, it was much better to train the team to use a new RDBMS than to use external consultant; after all, our team is a development team.

Since it's completely free, the ROI means only the time spent by the team to get the database up and running, and the time maintaining it. I'd say it doesn't compare with any other solution I've worked with before.

PostgreSQL has extensive and comprehensive documentation. Chances are that you'll find your answers there for 99% of the cases. For those answers you don't find, you can always go to StackOverflow. If you're not a DBA or a programmer, I'd suggest hiring external help, as with all the cases with databases (RDBMS or not).

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.

Strong enforcement of data types, because it can catch many errors and mistakes and protects data. Standard conformance, because in the end you are not locked to single vendor.

We used MySQL for many tasks, because there were simply more documentation available, but while using it, we found many serious weaknesses with it like no data validation even for string length, no transactions, etc. PostgreSQL catches a lot of things that MySQL didn't because it is serious about the data it protects!

It needs more parallelism for big tables. This is already in PostgreSQL 9.6 beta so things are looking promising.

We've been using it in production since 1999.

We have had no major issues with the deployment, but tweaking does need to be done.

There have been no performance issues.

It's been able to scale for our needs.

Excellent mailing lists with active developers. Once I sent them my query which was about slow performance due to double sorting (group by, order by), and the fix for it went into PostgreSQL 7.4, because Tom Lane noticed that in such cases PostgreSQL should not do two sorts. So after upgrading to 7.4 things got way faster without touching the code at all.

We previously used MySQL. PostgreSQL tries to solve things in the correct way for all platforms, all file systems, and all users. In the end, this means you get a better working and more stable system. They try to stay away from hacks and other non-portable or limited solutions and prefer to work inside the system. For example, an operating system already does many optimizations so why would one want to reinvent things with raw file systems, etc. like Oracle tried to do in the past?

Defaults for PostgreSQL are very low. In almost all situations one has to do some tweaking to make it perform better. It does not take much time to do it at first, but has to be done!

I did it myself with help from the internet. For beginners, I would advise you to read the documentation that is available. Also, you should read some books such as "PostgreSQL: Up and Running, 2nd Edition". "PostgreSQL Administration Essentials", "PostgreSQL 9 Administration Cookbook, 2nd Edition". Alternatively, you could look into getting professional help if you are in hurry.

Explore this new world. PostgreSQL has taken a quantum leap over the last 20 years, and now it seriously threatens more established database vendors.