PostgreSQL Reviews

The database is used for our customers' products. We also offer some products on our POC system, and our customer's POC systems post some data stored on PostgreSQL on the cloud. Our company's data doesn't store at PostgreSQL. We still have our system MS SQL and Oracle.

The solution is very easy to use. You don't have to be extremely knowledgeable or technical to take advantage of it.

The product is quite flexible. 

We find it to be one of the cheapest options on the market. It's not expensive to use. 

The pricing could be better.

We've used the solution for ten years at this point. It may even be longer.

The solution is quite stable. We haven't had any issues with it. We haven't experienced bugs or glitches. It's reliable.

The solution is scalable. We've made some upgrades on our system, and it was so easy to do for the actual upgrades. In terms of the database itself, we haven't really had any issues with it.

I don't have any experience with technical support. Other teams in our company end up handling that. I can't speak to their knowledgeability or responsiveness having never worked with them.

I don't recall us using a different product.

In terms of the initial setup, we generally use the cloud system. The cloud system is very easy to set up these days. If you choose some with pre-installment, you trigger the system, and it's pretty automatic. You don't need a lot of things configured. After that, after you start to use it, you can tune it as you like. We made some adjustments on the system - such as additional storage or additional RAM or other resources - and we were able to add those in very easily.

The production system we use for reporting is a read-only system. Due to this, if we use the production system for reporting or other kinds of big data, the system can be slow on the customer side. However, Postgres can still service all the tasks which we need.

We haven't needed too many people to handle deployment and maintenance. There's been around ten or so that have been on it.

The pricing is reasonable. Of course, our economy has been hurt a little due to COVID-19. The pandemic has affected a lot of us. It's been hard for the companies that sell services with a database cost. You really have to choose the lowest-priced options right now. Postgres offers a fair price on the market, currently. That said, it could be less expensive, especially right now.

We definitely plan to continue to use the solution in the future. It's been quite good for us.

That said, I'm not in the financial department and I don't know the exact cost of the solution.

We're just customers and end-users.

We generally use the last version, as we try to ensure all of our programs are the latest technology. Therefore, we generally use cloud platforms like Amazon or Microsoft, which is Azure. Whichever version is on the cloud, we generally use that version.

That said, some of it is on the cloud and some of it is on-premise. In Turkey, we have some legal requirements that require some data to be stored in our country. We have to store it locally. Therefore, we can't use the cloud completely.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

I would rate the product at an eight out of ten.

We use it for processing files mostly. It integrates basically with the SQL Server. On the server-side it uses the SQL Server, then from the files that are generated from SQL Server we do have an application running using Microsoft, and we attach it to a Postgres server. We do is for the backups there from time to time.

Overall, the solution is very good. 

The solution is free to use.

It is easy to use and quite stable. It's as robust as Oracle, however, SQL Server is easier to use I think.

The product is very similar to the SQL Server. 

The installation is quite fast.

If you look at overall PostgreSQL, it could be easier to use.

I'm not yet able to use all of the features on the product at this time. 

I'm not really able to customize it.

The integration could be easier. SQL Server has an easier integration process, for example, as a comparison.

With Postgres, you can run it in Windows Server, however, there are other things that you have to run.

The product is more for technical people. For example, SQL Server is for anybody. Even newer users can just pick it up and learn from it and mess with it and run it. You can't do that with PostgreSQL. It has more of a learning curve. YOu need more training and documentation.

We've been using the solution for about five years. We've used it for a while, however, it is only on a few workstations.

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

There are only a couple of users at this time as we restrict it only to local implementations. Per store, we do have certain applications that use it. 

We haven't reached out to techncial support. As with Linux, if you want tech support then you have to pay a subscription for it. The free version is, with what we have here, working well and we haven't had problems.

I have only a couple of people helping me with regards to the tech support, internally. That's why we spend a lot of time focusing more on the SQL Server and the Microsoft products.

We did not previously use other products. 

I've also used Oracle and Microsoft SQL. This product is free and more robust than Oracle, however, Microsoft SQL might be easier to use.

The installation is pretty quick. It's not hard to set up. I wouldn't describe it as a complex process. 

We only have a couple of people on staff that can handle deployment and maintenance. 

The product is free. You don't have to pay a license fee. 

The last one that we used is version 11 or something like that. I'm not sure if that's the latest version or not.

Postgres is similar to Linux. It's designed for people who would know what they want, who would have to set up what they need, and they would use it, and they know that it's straightforward, so that other people cannot just go in and mess with it.

I'd rate the product as a nine out of ten.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. 

We are using PostgreSQL for databases.

PostgreSQL is very easy to use. I have experience in Oracle SQL and PostgreSQL uses the same syntax which makes it is easy for me to develop.

The performance of PostgreSQL could improve.

I have been using PostgreSQL for approximately three years.

In my usage of PostgreSQL, it has been stable.

PostgreSQL is scalable.

We have approximately 70 people using the solution in my organization.

When our engineers have difficulty we use Google to search for a solution online. There is information online that can be very helpful.

I have used MariaDB and Oracle MySQL.

The installation is very simple and took three to four hours.

I did the implementation of PostgreSQL. We have a team of three manages and fifteen engineers that do the maintenance of the solution.

There is an annual license.

I rate PostgreSQL an eight out of ten.

We use it as a backend for some vendor-supplied tools and products. We also do a certain amount of software development, and we use it as the database platform behind our own software.

We have a number of deployments, and the version number very much depends on the vendor software requirements. We have on-premises and cloud deployments.

It is a pretty comprehensive database system. Its performance is good, and it does what it is supposed to do. It also integrates very well.

There are some products out there that have a slightly different method of implementation for the SQL language. Some of those are slightly better in some areas, and PostgreSQL is slightly better in some areas. I would probably like to match all of those products together. It is just down to the functionality. For example, Oracle has a number of options within SQL that are outside of what you would class as the SQL standard. PostgreSQL misses some of those, but PostgreSQL does other things that are better than what Oracle does. I would like to merge those two products so that there is a certain amount of functionality in a single product.

We have been using it probably for two years.

In terms of the number of users, the users on PostgreSQL itself are probably application-level users, so you may only find two or three accounts per instance, but the application-level users can easily go up to 300.

We use the open-source product. We don't take it from any given supplier. So, we haven't got any tech support.

The tech support primarily is me. I am a systems administrator, and I do database administration as well. If we need any further in-depth support, depending on which product is sitting on top of that database, we will go to the vendor, but like most IT teams, we would admit that Google is your best friend.

We were using Sybase. We've actually transitioned most of it over to PostgreSQL.

It is easy to install. The deployment duration depends on what you're deploying. If you just want a database, I can have a PostgreSQL database installed and deployed in probably about 20 minutes. If you're looking for clustering or failover and mirroring, that would obviously impact the time, but it doesn't take a significant amount of time.

I deploy it myself.

It is open source. There is no licensing.

It is a very good RDBMS, and I'm quite happy with it. It does what it says, and it does it fairly well. I've seen some bits that are stronger in other products and some bits that are weaker in other products. My recommendation would depend on the requirements and the use cases.

I would rate PostgreSQL a nine out of 10. It does its job adequately, and I am quite happy with what it does at the moment. You wouldn't hear a 10 from me for any database vendor at the moment.

We use the solution to conduct surveys and consider this approach to be one which is cheaper for us. 

The solution is quite stable. This said, it's more prestigious to use MySQL, although we haven't made comparisons for safety and reliability.

The performance is too low, although we haven't tested for this. 

The interface climate could be better. There are many third party ones that we can use so it would be nice to see more support with the database diagrams.

We've been using PostgreSQL for certain small projects for the past three years.

The solution is quite stable for our use. 

We haven't tested scalability.

I cannot say for sure if we have plans to increase usage, as we have yet to run a test. 

While we do benefit from technical support, this is not something that we have required. 

The initial setup wasn't difficult. I'd say it was quite straightforward.

The installation took less than an hour. 

The need for our customers to pay for licences is contingent on their projects and budgets. It varies. 

We are not consultants to PotrgresSQL. We are usually consulted when it comes to using Microsoft MySQL Server, since we consider it to be quite robust and to have all the necessary support from Microsoft.

Fewer than 10 percent of our customers make use of PostgresSQL.

I would recommend the solution to others when when there is a desire to have projects and cost is a concern.

I would rate PostgresSQL as an eight out of ten, although this owes itself to personal preference and not to low performance. 

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 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.

For this question I will focus on our usage of PostgreSQL in the company. A great differentiator for this database, if compared with other providers, is its easy extensibility and the existence of data types that would fall in the category of NoSQL. In particular, HSTORE (key/value store) and JSON (documents). This feature makes it possible to combine the strengths of relational and non-relational artifacts. Specifically transactionality and indexing vs. hierarchical structures and flexibility.

The company I work for creates economic time series and forecasting’s based on monthly surveys with companies. Besides a set of general questions, different sectors of economic activity include questions specific to their sector. This means that we have different sets of answers depending on the survey. Instead of having a separate table for each set of answers, it would be nice to have a single survey data table including all answers from all surveys. The Oracle implementation that was implemented around 13 years ago stored the numerically encoded answers in a string. Along with that there were tables associated for each question in the string field name, the starting position, and the width of the answer code within the string. This system is very prone to errors and, more problematic; it is not flexible enough to respond to new requirements in a timely manner if our researcher wished to add questions in single months that are relevant for that specific period in the economic history of the country. All this was only possible at the cost of long implementation and testing times and eventually was never really done. With PostgreSQL we moved what used to be a string with fixed positions into an HSTORE (a key/value store) field. We have now named answers (the key) and their values. The HSTORE field is flexible, i.e. adding a single question in a single month simply means that only for that month there is a key pointing to the single question's answer.

v9.5, which we currently don't have in our productive systems, already has some key features that we would like to use. In particular, row level security, a feature allowing to restrict the visibility of rows based on a set of policies. A feature that is not available yet and I would welcome is more of a by-product. PostgreSQL offers very good documentation features, which we integrated in the technical documentation on our internal Wiki. Changes in the database are immediately available in the Wiki without the need of editing the Wiki page manually. It is possible, and we do it, to attach comments on objects and their components. These comments also appear then in the Wiki documentation. Unfortunately it is not possible, i.e. there is not an implementation yet, to attach comments to function parameters and return type. We make extensive use of functions as structured interface to applications. This feature would make our documentation more complete. We created a workaround for that, but still, it would be nice to have it built in the database.

I use the open source database management system PostgreSQL in different situations. In the company I work for we have version 9.3.5 running on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4.4.7-4 64 bit. The choice of operating system and database version is not a thing we can influence much. Both are hosted by the central informatics services of the company and we have what we get. We can however decide which RDBMS to use and we chose PostgreSQL. For the web services that we implement for the association Swiss PostgreSQL Users Group we use version 9.4.6 on a Debian 4.9.2-10 (Jessie) server. Finally on my local development computer I use version 9.5.2 on LinuxMint 17.3 Rosa, a Debian like and Ubuntu based operating system.

In my company, PostgreSQL was introduced to replace Oracle slightly more than three years ago. Privately, I have been using PostgreSQL for about six to seven years.

There were no issues with the deployment.

We had no issues with the performance.

We had once a problem with a script that created a huge SQL statement with about 40,000 function calls. This led to a stack overflow. Thanks to the community mailing lists we were able to find quickly the origin of the problem and the correct approach to avoid it.

In this case that would map to the community support on mailing lists and IRC channels, and this type of service is very good. It is also possible, of course, to buy support from companies like Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH (Austria), EDB in the US or 2ndQuadrant in Europe. I don't have direct experience with that, but I have often heard from colleagues that they are all excellent. This is quite simple to explain, because many of these companies' employees are active developers of the code base of PostgreSQL. They are also present on the many PostgreSQL mailing lists. If you are running a very critical system, and by that I mean a system, which failure could cause damages to people, I would strongly recommend that you hire at least two of these experts for a thorough audit.

We used Sentinel which was awesome but it did not provide metric views.

Installing a PostgreSQL cluster is straightforward. However, it is important to be aware of the architecture of the cluster, its configuration possibilities, and its authorization system. For the tuning of the configuration parameters there is no recipe, because it all depends on how the data looks like. Therefore it is necessary to understand what the individual parameters do and how they influence the overall performance. The correct usage of databases and schemas together with the authorization system, are important in order to build secure systems. It happens still too often on the world wide web that applications interacting with a database use roles with much too many privileges, creating security weaknesses. This however is not only a problem of PostgreSQL.

We did not implement the database software. What we implement is the design of the database and its interfaces toward third party systems and in-house applications. In the world of databases the person or team dealing with how data must be stored and accessed must possess complete knowledge about the processes being involved. It is not uncommon that web developer ask for accesses, which they are not entitled to and it is important to be able to offer an alternative. The most typical is a test database instance that web developers can use as playground.

PostgreSQL is a community product and has no owner other than the community itself. There are companies specialized in offering services and add-ons on top of PostgreSQL, but the database software itself is free, open source and licenced through a BSD and MIT derived licence of its own (https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/FAQ#What_is_the_license_of_PostgreSQL.3F).

Besides the simple fact of being an open product that can be used at virtually no cost, the quality of the code base is extremely good. The development process is transparent and the documentation is, with its 3000+ pages in the pdf format for version 9.5, exhaustive and complete. The community is very active and open to suggestions.