5 ms·

One reason why I still can't use GCE in 2016. No PostgreSQL support for CloudSQL. I can find alternatives for other services, but I don't want to compromise on

One reason why I still can't use GCE in 2016. No PostgreSQL support for CloudSQL. I can find alternatives for other services, but I don't want to compromise on the choice of relational database. Note: I understand there are third-party providers for PostgreSQL, but I'd rather have Google's.

_asummers 10y ago
This is on my short wishlist for GCE. It's such obvious feature parity that it's very strange they're not doing it.
- hhandoko 10y ago
  I believe they are (as mentioned by other commenter), but it's taking too long :)
matthewrudy 10y ago
Totally agree, Google Container Engine (hosted kubernetes) plus managed Postgresql would be my dream setup.
ecnahc515 10y ago
Have you found any compelling hosted Postgres RDS alternatives?
- hhandoko 10y ago
  I mean, there is ElephantSQL [1] and Aiven [2], but I'd rather have something from Google themselves since I consider relational database a core part of the architecture and infrastructure. [1] - https://www.elephantsql.com/ https://www.elephantsql.com/ [2] - https://aiven.io/ https://aiven.io/
lobster_johnson 10y ago
Googlers on HN have commented before that they're working on it. No ETA, though. With AWS now offering both plain-old PostgreSQL and souped-up-PostgreSQL-on-Aurora [1], whatever Google produces needs to be great in order to compete. However, I fear they'll initially come out with something that's on par with the current MySQL support in Cloud SQL, which is just a vanilla MySQL server behind a UI/API. (For example, Cloud SQL's read-replica stuff is reportedly just MySQL binlog replication.) Better than nothing, of course. Cloud SQL also has some annoyances (such as not supporting private IPs and the need for the Cloud SQL Proxy [2]) that I hope they're working on. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-aurora-update-postgresql-compatibility/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-aurora-update-postgr... [2] https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/sql-proxy https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/sql-proxy
- hhandoko 10y ago
  Yeah, I heard this too. TBH, I don't need Aurora-level performance (although it would be a nice option in the future), I'm just happy to have a vendor-managed PostgreSQL instance with granular price points. C'mon Google! :)

_asummers 10y ago

This is on my short wishlist for GCE. It's such obvious feature parity that it's very strange they're not doing it.

hhandoko 10y ago
I believe they are (as mentioned by other commenter), but it's taking too long :)

matthewrudy 10y ago

Totally agree, Google Container Engine (hosted kubernetes) plus managed Postgresql would be my dream setup.

ecnahc515 10y ago

Have you found any compelling hosted Postgres RDS alternatives?

hhandoko 10y ago
I mean, there is ElephantSQL [1] and Aiven [2], but I'd rather have something from Google themselves since I consider relational database a core part of the architecture and infrastructure. [1] - https://www.elephantsql.com/ https://www.elephantsql.com/ [2] - https://aiven.io/ https://aiven.io/

lobster_johnson 10y ago

Googlers on HN have commented before that they're working on it. No ETA, though. With AWS now offering both plain-old PostgreSQL and souped-up-PostgreSQL-on-Aurora [1], whatever Google produces needs to be great in order to compete. However, I fear they'll initially come out with something that's on par with the current MySQL support in Cloud SQL, which is just a vanilla MySQL server behind a UI/API. (For example, Cloud SQL's read-replica stuff is reportedly just MySQL binlog replication.) Better than nothing, of course. Cloud SQL also has some annoyances (such as not supporting private IPs and the need for the Cloud SQL Proxy [2]) that I hope they're working on. [1] https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-aurora-update-postgresql-compatibility/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-aurora-update-postgr... [2] https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/sql-proxy https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/sql-proxy

hhandoko 10y ago
Yeah, I heard this too. TBH, I don't need Aurora-level performance (although it would be a nice option in the future), I'm just happy to have a vendor-managed PostgreSQL instance with granular price points. C'mon Google! :)