PostgreSQL Reviews

This solution is very good for getting data. It is very useful for reporting purposes. We also use one of the tools of IBM Cognos for reporting purposes.

For small-scale setups, the solution is stable.

The solution is open-source and free to use.

Currently, we are working with Postgre's economy, and we are not able to implement real-time solutions with our existing architecture. There's a general lack of real-time data from Postgre.

The solution isn't as stable for larger data sets. 

The scalability is limited.

We'd like the solution to be faster. 

I've been working with Postgre for the last two years. However, the organization that I was working with from the beginning has been using this. This was open-source and they've been working with it since 2017.

The product is stable only for working on relatively small data. It's not ideal for large amounts of data. Our business has grown rapidly. We have more customers and our data has grown very rapidly. We need to manage performance and tuning and may need a grander product. The performance could be better.

We're struggling with scalability. It's one of the issues we're facing right now.

This is hosted by this AWS. We generally raise tickets to them whenever we're in need of assistance.

For example, if we're doing any replication or any of that thing, we just raise tickets, and it gets resolved through them.

The support has been pretty good.

I was not involved in the actual deployment of the solution and therefore cannot speak to how difficult or simple the process was.

Currently, I've been given the role to do some research and switch to a different database.

The solution is open-source. We don't need to have a license in order to use it. 

We're currently looking for a more modern solution to replace Postgre. I'm aware of AWS Redshift, Query, and Nextly. These are major players in the market.

We are just a customer of Postgre.

Since the data volume has increased rapidly, we are concerned Postgre won't be suitable for our long-term requirements. We're currently looking for an all-in-one option.

I'd advise users that are not looking for speed or do not have huge amounts of data to try this solution. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

Typically, our team runs the database and then the applications, on Postgres. However, I'm not part of the development process.

The solution is quite stable and very reliable.

On the cloud side of the product, the solution scales quite well.

The initial setup is quick and easy.

I don't work directly on development, however, I haven't heard of any complaints from the development team in general. I can't speak to any features that may be missing. Our team seems quite satisfied with it overall.

It would be great if the solution offered even more integration capabilities.

We've been using the solution for the past two or three years at this point.

The stability, overall, has been good. I have not heard of issues with bugs or glitches. I cannot recall it crashing or freezing. Its performance has been reliable.

The product can scale well. However, this is mostly the case on the cloud, which more easily can scale as there are no physical limitations to hold a company back. If a company needs to scale using this solution, it can do so with relative ease, specifically if they use a cloud deployment.

We only have about ten to 15 or so users on the solution right now. On the products we produce there may be more, however, that varies. There could be a hundred or so users.

We have plans to continue to use the solution going forward.

We don't really use technical support too often. We have our own team that we can turn to, and they can handle most, if not all, issues.

We've used a few other products previously. We're also using MongoDB, or at least, we will be, in an application that we've just started.

The initial setup is not complex at all. I would describe it as straightforward and rather simple. 

The deployment is quick as well. It might have taken us about 45 minutes to an hour or so to get everything up and running. It's great.

We have a technical team or two or three people that can manage the deployment and maintenance. You don't need a big team.

We handled the implementation process ourselves. We didn't need the assistance of any consultants or integrators. It was pretty straightforward, and therefore we didn't need the extra help.

The product is a direct service, and it is free to use. There isn't a licensing fee.

We are simply a customer and end-user. We don't have a business relationship with PostgreSQL.

The solution is deployed both on the cloud and on-premises. We use more than one deployment model.

I can't recall the exact version number we are using, however, it's my understanding that it is not necessarily the latest version.

I'd recommend this product to other organizations. It's worked well for us so far.

In general, I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

The database for the accounting systems is our primary use case for this solution. Business software is 80% of my use case in the accounting software. It's a good tool for planning. I work with financial data and the data mining aspect is very important, as I need to access the data easily. The data is the most important thing. Sometimes the software developers forget this part because they just want to save the data on the database, but they don't know how to manipulate the data. The performance of the solution is dependant on how easily and quickly you can obtain access to the data.

I can use Unity Kinematic. It's not easy but you can create a multi-tenant database in Postgres and I think it's a must-have in software development. With the database, you can provide a multi-component at the same service with the same performance, scalability, or all those things. 

PostgreSQL is limited to 32 TB in maximum table size for version 9.6 and earlier. This can be problematic for large databases. We currently don't have the multi-tenant feature and we require that with the contract integrated reassurance. To create have one tenant or more tenants, I need to implement or develop a software solution to connect with the multi-tenant, and to connect each tenant. PostgreSQL is not great for software developers, but it is adequate. For developers, databases such as Firebase and MongoDB technology are better. With PostgreSQL, all you need the database for is to save your data. This function on its own is not enough. The database and applications can become very slow. To debug you need to make the database query display information on your device. Some developers are not experienced in developing databases. This is especially difficult for junior software developers, and they often need more experience to be able to deal with that aspect.

We have been using Postgres for about 10 years. 

It is a stable database.

Because PostgreSQL is limited in regards to the amount of data it can hold in a single table, you often think it might be better to change the technology. Other than that, it is a good solution for business.

Sometimes it is not simple to resolve issues, but the PostgreSQL community sometimes helps to find answers to questions.

I think it is difficult to setup. I amended my ID and Oracle advised me to change it, for it to work.

If you want one tenant, you can use MySQL. If you want a multi-tenant, I think Postgres is better. SQL on PostgreSQL is linked to Oracle. Oracle and Postgres is the same thing, the same language. You will not have a big change for the software developers to migrate from Oracle to Postgres. 

I would rate PostgreSQL 8 out of 10. 

One use case is that we installed it and built it for a customer so that he has access to the database, and he can create whatever he would like to create on it. 

We have deployed it on-premises and in the cloud.

It is easy to install and easy to manage. There is no license on it, so it is free. 

There is high compatibility with Oracle, and there are many tools for the migration of data from Oracle to Postgre. 

It still needs to be more mature and have some backup feature. We are normally dealing with Oracle's data, and we have very strong online tools to back up the data and do other things. PostgreSQL still needs to do more in this area as well as in the high availability area. There are many external tools that you can use for PostgreSQL's high availability, but there is no embedded tool within PostgreSQL for high availability.

It could have a feature similar to Oracle for working on a distributed system. It can have some scripts to improve the monitoring and some tools to do performance analysis. We have a workaround for most of such requirements except for the support for a distributed system, which is very difficult to have. This area should be included in the core of the database itself. 

I have been using this solution for almost one year.

I didn't have any issues, but I think Oracle is more stable.

I didn't have experience with that because we didn't make any changes since we built it. All I have is one server, and I can only have one standby, nothing more. 

We didn't contact them. We didn't face any serious issues that required support.

I am also using Oracle Database. The main difference is the scalability. PostgreSQL could be used for small to medium databases but not for a huge production database. I still prefer to have Oracle Database.

The initial setup was straightforward. It did not take too long. It took maybe one hour to do the installation.

It is free. There is no license on it.

Go ahead and implement it. It is a nice product, but keep a backup and try to use it for small to medium projects or companies. Some of the customers are demanding PostgreSQL nowadays, so we will keep on implementing it.

I would rate PostgreSQL an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for media purposes. We manage the sites of one of the largest sports business papers and multiple TV channels. So, we develop the websites.

We are increasingly using their support for JSON, which we find to be very complete, something I made use of in the past. The solution provides complete support in terms of the SQL dialect and behaves nicely when it comes to transactions. One can change the database structure transactionally. This is one of the few databases that allows this. I like it. 

The solution is comparable in sophistication with that of Oracle. Each product has a few things less and more than the other. We also like that the solution is open source. We have good performance with a small footprint. It's rather nice. It's very robust.

The solution could be improved through an upgrade to the latest version. 

A better graphic user-interface would be nice to see. 

There is nothing I particularly dislike about the solution. The data propagation in master-slave configurations would be a good example. This is one of the features that I understood the least, yet we have it working and use it to propagate from the content management system database to the multiple publishing databases. 

This said, I would like this propagation feature to be simplified for new users and to come with better explanation. However, I will refrain from giving criticism on this point, as I do not know if they already handled this in the last version. Overall, I have only praise for the solution.

I cannot point to anything in particular that we are missing out on at the moment. What comes to mind are features that I have yet to try, although I don't  have any wish lists for PostgreSQL at the moment. I don't know how it stacks up when it comes to the importing and exporting of data. For databases involving this, we just make use of Redshift, which is verified from PostgreSQL and developed by Amazon. 

I have been using PostgreSQL for a couple of years.

The solution is very stable. We have databases that have been running for years.

We have scaled the solution just to three slave machines, but it works well when it comes to master and slave. 

Mostly, support consists of the community and there are several consultancies, should the need arise, although we have never had use of these. There have been no issues on this end. Community support has always been sufficient for us. 

On a single machine, the initial setup is extremely easy. I also find configuration to be very simple. It is similar to MySQL in that a person must know what he wants when it comes to setting up the solution, in which certain features would come into play. Setting it up in a different way will involve the use of multiple search engines. 

With the solution, one installs it and whatever he tunes is optional. Of course, he would have to play with the configurations if he wishes to have specific personality, such as cluster configurations, or tuning for very demanding performance. Overall, for small things or development, one need only install it, start it and it's done. 

While the length of the deployment varies with the configuration, a simple one will take a couple of minutes. 

We deploy the solution both on-premises and on AWS. 

I had my doubts about the functionality before joining this company, as it seemed very complex. It turns out that the solution is actually very simple to set up and we have it working all the time without any problems. It survives the network partitions, so we like this very much. 

My advice is that a person just try it and use it. For me, it beats out JSON and is superior to MongoDB. It works in a completely different way. But, overall, I would rather use PostgreSQL when it comes to starting and manipulating JSON and it boasts superior integrity and performance. Of course, there are specific things that MongoDB does differently. A person's mileage may vary, depending on what he wishes to accomplish. 

I rate PostgreSQL as a nine out of ten and I choose to knock it down a point only because it could use a better graphic user-interface. 

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.