undefined | Better HN

0 pointssqldba10y ago0 comments

SS is more advanced than PG out of the box. Built in scalability and HA; far more reliable point in time backup/restore; PG even only had a plan cache added recently (the past year or so?)

Then you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures.

That's not counting all the non engine stuff. There is no adequate free software equivalent to reporting services or analysis services.

Sorry PG isn't even close. PG is no doubt extremely important and the best of the free software pack. And you will pay your life to MS for adequate licensing. But there really is no comparison.

MySQL on the other hand is a flat out joke.

0 comments

adwf10y ago

> Then you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures.

Err, Postgres has full text search, columnstores and native procedures. Memory tables is slightly different, but doable.

It's an open source project with extensions, you can't just classify it by the core.

philliphaydon10y ago

Lets not forget proper JSONB support. Oh god it's the most amazing thing to ever happen to a relational database.

olavgg10y ago

> far more reliable point in time backup/restore;

Hmmm. I use ZFS snapshots for backup of my PostgreSQL instances. It's faster, as reliable as it can be, and I can run a full backup every fifth minute and keep the snapshot history on a database that weights 2TB.

Jweb_Guru10y ago

> PG even only had a plan cache added recently (the past year or so?)

What? You have no idea what you're talking about.

> you have full text search, built in columnstore, in memory tables, native procedures.

Postgres has all of these (column stores only available as extensions).

I don't think you're very familiar with Postgres.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse