38 ms·
Google Cloud SQL for Postgres
- sandGorgon 10y agothis is huge! I take my words back - RDS finally has a competitor.
- mvitorino 10y agoYes! We have been asking for this for a while now when asked for feedback about what we would value. Managed ElasticSearch is next on our wishlist.
- saosebastiao 10y agoThe last piece of the puzzle for me to have a full stack alternative to AWS. Thanks Google! Edit: not a complete end of the world, but it would be really nice (and completely easy/safe) to have the uuid-ossp extension available.
- daenney 10y agopgcrypto is available which has UUID v4 support.
- cridenour 10y agoHas anyone seen documentation that it supports PostGIS? Edit: Nevermind, it does! https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions
- masterleep 10y agoWhat about citext? It's not on there.
- cridenour 10y agoI'm surprised to not see it (or other similarly popular data types) on there, but can't prove it doesn't work without trying it.
- jerrysievert 10y agosadly, the only language extension is plpgsql, which is many less than aws, which happens to support plv8 as well.
- clhodapp 10y agoI wish uuid-ossp was in there... Being able to generate type 4 and 5 UUIDs on the database side is extremely convenient, especially during migrations.
- koolba 10y agoIt includes pgcrypto so you can use the new gen_random_uuid() from there to generate UUIDs. For the record, uuid-ossp is a steaming pile and there's no reason to use it for anything on a modern Postgres install.
- shawn-butler 10y agoWhat exactly do you mean by this? Your comment is uninformative without some substance.
- koolba 10y agoThe code is pretty much unmaintained at this point, it's a pain in the ass to build, besides the v4 UUID generation function everything else in there is useless, and the v4 UUID generation function is 6x slower than the one in pgcrypto[1]. There's no reason to use it and incorporating it into projects just creates headaches down the road. [1]: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/52CF07C2.3080101%40ohmu.fi#52CF07C2.3080101@ohmu.fi https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/flat/52CF07C2.3080101%...
- clhodapp 10y agoI believe that type 5 (and I guess type 3) UUIDs both have legitimate use cases, especially when data migrations are involved. Both of these types are supported by uuid-ossp but not by pgcrypto.
- X-Istence 10y agogen_random_uuid() Exists in the pgcrypto extension. Only does UUID 4, which should work for many applications.
- fortytw2 10y agoExtremely exciting, been waiting for this for a while
- hvo 10y agoYep.I now believe Google is serious about cloud.It is beyond me why it takes Google too long to do this.
- nodesocket 10y agoFirst to market does not always win (see Apple). Google can take all the lessons learned from AWS RDS and other players and build better solutions.
- meddlepal 10y agoI don't think it's an all or nothing game either. I think there is a lot of room for the big three IaaS platforms to coexist comfortably.
- leesalminen 10y agoI'm really excited about the future of GCP and that there is now a serious AWS competitor.
- _wmd 10y agoThe company's irrevocably ingrained customer support culture will ensure they'll never be a serious AWS competitor, not with all the engineering and money in the world
- bqe 10y agoThis might be true, but AWS's support is not good. To get good AWS support for when their ELBs aren't working, or when half of your EBS volumes have multi-second IO latency, you need to pay for premium support, which is 10% of your bill. https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/premiumsupport/pricing/
- poooogles 10y agoThis is the same for GCP. Unless you pay for gold support it's essentially useless.
- revmoo 10y agoIt's ridiculous. I shouldn't have to pay someone to tell them their shit is broken.
- manigandham 10y agoGCP will be replacing the percentage support cost model with a different system: https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2017/03/reimagining-support-for-Google-Cloud-Platform-new-pricing-model-and-partnerships.html https://cloudplatform.googleblog.com/2017/03/reimagining-sup...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- 10y ago
- laixer 10y agoCloud SQL for Postgres is launching today and will be available for all users early next week. Source: Work on Cloud SQL.
- masterleep 10y agoAwesome! This is something I was really hoping for.
- sandGorgon 10y agoI dont see it enabled on my account - I still only see mysql. How does one get it ?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- laixer 10y agoIt will be available for all users early next week.
- merb 10y agofinally.
- numbsafari 10y agoAny public timeline on HA feature availability, or way to be an early adopter?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- samaysharma 10y agoThe replication and high availability related documentation is here:- https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/high-availability https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/high-availability https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/replication/ https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/replication/ Any timelines on high availability support? This would be pretty helpful
- nodesocket 10y agoWait did this leak before the keynote announcement? :-) (I'm at Google Cloud NEXT right now).
- laixer 10y agoNo, it was mentioned in the keynote.
- nodesocket 10y agolol. I need to get off HN.
- chillydawg 10y agoWell, about 10 different googlers have hinted at it on HN threads and elsewhere over the last fortnight.
- jacques_chester 10y agoThey've been hinting for months.
- clhodapp 10y agoThis is definitely going to be very useful when it's fully fleshed out but be warned that this initial beta doesn't support Google-managed replication or HA (to say nothing of an SLA, of course).
- meddlepal 10y agoHuge news! This + GKE + the new improved GCE billing setup is killer for most shops.
- chetanahuja 10y agoCould you elaborate why that combination is killer? Is the new billing setup more efficient cost wise? What is the new billing setup?
- JoshGlazebrook 10y agoHopefully this pushes Microsoft to expand their offering. I'd love managed Postgres in Azure.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- tda 10y agoI heard a closed beta for managed postgres on Azure is currently running
- GordonS 10y agoInteresting! Is there any info online about this, or is it all just 'secret squirrel' rumours for now?
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- user5994461 10y agoHeard they have a very easy setup for SQL Server with 3 instances and high availability. Don't think that they care (or should care) much about Postgre. One doesn't go to Azure for that.
- laughfactory 10y agoExcited to see this, but holy shit is it unclear what expected costs could be. It seems like it might be on the cheap/affordable side of things, but it's not obvious. I almost prefer to just use Compose.io because at least the pricing is clear.
- advisedwang 10y agoI guess it's unclear because the instance, storage and networking are all separately priced? The pricing calculator (https://cloud.google.com/products/calculator/ https://cloud.google.com/products/calculator/) might help.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- ankushio 10y agoThe pricing is listed here: https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/pricing#pg-pricing https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/pricing#pg-pricin... Sample monthly pricing: db-f1-micro instance : $7.56 for compute; 10GB HDD : $0.9 for storage; No network cost if the database instance is talking to a GCE VM in the same region; Disclaimer: I work on Google Cloud SQL
- merb 10y agowhen ha would cost the same i.e. ~20€ than that would be amazingly cheap. i mean on aws you would pay the same (20 €), but you need to pay 1 year upfront.. and if ha would be like 16 € you would only be a little bit more expensive than a 3 year aws rds offering (1€ per month), which is less a problem since the storage is cheaper and you are way more flexible (canceling and recreating to a bigger instance)
- FLUX-YOU 10y ago>db-f1-micro >db-g1-small >db-n1-highmem-2 >db-n1-standard-8 >D32 Database Instance (16GB RAM) >Tier D0, D1, D2, D4, D8, D16, D32 What's up with cloud instance naming schemes? I get this is kind of similar to Amazon, but man, I bet these are really unwieldy in conversations esp. if someone is new to a platform.
- NatW 10y agoWhat is the maximum disk space for this offering? Amazon's RDS peaks out at just 6TB currently.
- laixer 10y ago10TB.
- brightball 10y agoWell, I guess I can try out Google Cloud finally
- dhd415 10y agoVery exciting, but high availability, instance cloning, and read replicas are listed as "This functionality is not yet supported for PostgreSQL instances" in the docs. Seems like those need to be available before it's a realistic option for production workloads.
- ozgune 10y ago(Ozgun from Citus) As someone who interacts with PostgreSQL on-prem and cloud deployments frequently, I'm curious on the Hacker News community's thoughts on one question. AWS has a fairly mature RDS Postgres offering. What would motivate you to use Google Cloud Postgres instead? I've heard of four reasons from users: not on AWS, don't want to be locked into one vendor, cost, and better support. Do any of these reasons resonate with you or are there others?
- theptip 10y agoAs a Google customer (of both Compute/Container Engine and Cloud SQL), I'd rather use a Mysql instance hosted next to my application on Google's network than a Postgres instance that's an internet-hop away in Amazon's cloud. If I was currently running my apps on AWS that's where my DB would live too (and I'd be using RDS Posgres there). The other reasons listed are an order of magnitude less important for my cost/benefit calculus (though things like cost and support will definitely matter to orgs bigger than mine).
- michael-go 10y agoWhat motivates me personally is not that I think Google Postgres will be better than RDS (which is great for us so far), but because I want to move to GCP for other reasons (pricing, better UI & cli, GKE, BigQuery) and the managed Postgres RDS was the only thing that was important enough to keep us on AWS
- mhluongo 10y agoSame for us. We're migrating to GKE but are accessing Postgres over a gateway and leaving our DB heavy services on AWS... This was very good news.
- timc3 10y agoFantastic news.
- Fiahil 10y agoAwesome. Now, can you do the same for Elasticsearch ?
- softinio 10y agoThis is great news! Finally!
- jarym 10y agoThis is excellent news - am currently evaluating options for cloud Postgres. Only wish they'd support a few more extensions - https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions - e.g. plv8 would be great https://github.com/plv8/plv8 https://github.com/plv8/plv8
- tracker1 10y agoplv8 and HA are my two big ones... The main reason I'd choose postgres over alternatives would be plv8.
- bjelkeman-again 10y agoWe went with https://www.elephantsql.com https://www.elephantsql.com
- jerrysievert 10y agoI'd happily help them be able to support it ...
- jarym 10y agoJerry, your work on plv8 is fantastic and I hope someone from Google takes you up on your offer!
- jerrysievert 10y agothanks! and me too!
- jpgvm 10y agoWould just like to chip in and say I really appreciate plv8 and all the effort you put into it. :)
- oskari 10y agoIf you need plv8, high availability or replication features today in Google Cloud, our Aiven PostgreSQL service may fit your needs, have a look at https://aiven.io/postgresql https://aiven.io/postgresql
- DonkeyChan 10y agoI'm not building anything on top of google unless they give EOL time lines and stop pulling the rug out from under services.
- menacingly 10y agoStrongly agree. My perception is that they've got no grit, which stinks because Amazon has it in spades
- emodendroket 10y agoCan we all stop going on about "grit" yet?
- pfg 10y agoThey do have a one-year deprecation policy[1] for pretty much all of their GA offerings on GCP[2]. [1]: https://cloud.google.com/terms/ https://cloud.google.com/terms/ [2]: https://cloud.google.com/terms/deprecation https://cloud.google.com/terms/deprecation
- wwilson 10y agoYou can find our deprecation policy here: https://cloud.google.com/terms/ https://cloud.google.com/terms/ Disclaimer: I work on GCP, though not on Cloud SQL.
- dragonwriter 10y agoThey haven't really pulled the rug out for anything on Google Cloud (there've been a few things replaced, e.g., the old Master/Slave datastore on App Engine.) And while this doesn't have an deprecation policy applicable as a Beta feature, most GA Google Cloud features have a one-year deprecation policy, so even if they were retired, no one would have the rug pulled out.)
- manigandham 10y agoWhat exactly has gone away from GCP unexpectedly?
- 10y ago
- qaq 10y agois there IOPS info somewhere?
- jsolson 10y agoIOPS for GCE Persistent Disk volumes (which back Cloud SQL) scale with volume size: https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/disks/performance#type_comparison https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/disks/performance#type... (For "Local SSD" the IOPS are a function of the number of devices you attach)
- tarr11 10y agoThis makes me seriously consider switching from heroku for my rails postgres app. Probably could cut my costs significantly. Anyone have any comments or experiences with the Google app engine flex environment for ruby?
- jsolson 10y agoDrop me an email (see profile), I'll connect you with a Rubyist at Google who can talk all about Ruby on GCP.
- thagomizer 10y agoI'm the Ruby Developer Advocate for GCP. I've used App Engine Flex with Rails 5 on a couple projects recently. Nothing huge but one is in production (it is for a local non-profit). I've found it to be a great way to get things out the door quickly and I love the auto-scaling. It doesn't have all the magic of App Engine Standard and deploy times are slower than I'd like (~5 minutes). But I'm okay with that if I can use my own database, any library I want, and I have full portability. I did a blog post with some of the stuff that I learned: http://www.thagomizer.com/blog/2017/03/09/rails-on-app-engine.html http://www.thagomizer.com/blog/2017/03/09/rails-on-app-engin...
- nhumrich 10y agoI've been looking forward to this forever
- scardine 10y agoThe killer for me is PITR (point in time recover). A few years ago a colleague triggered and UPDATE without WHERE and PITR saved our sorry asses (on MS SQLServer, a fair product despite my antipathy MS). Postgres has it, but it is kind of a pain to setup correctly and I love RDS because I don't have to deal with the setup anymore.
- snuxoll 10y ago> Postgres has it, but it is kind of a pain to setup correctly and I love RDS because I don't have to deal with the setup anymore. Check out barman from 2ndquadrant, we've been running it in production for 2 years now - setup was crazy easy and the one time I had to do a restore (for the same reason, UPDATE without a WHERE) it was no-fuss to get it done. Of course, don't let me stop you from using RDS - but there's certainly user friendly backup solutions for Postgres when you're not :)
- ledgerdev 10y agoSorry it's not clear, but does google cloud sql for postgres have PITR or plan to support it in near future?
- scardine 10y agoFrom their homepage, the features not available for Beta (because Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL is in Beta, some PostgreSQL features are not yet available): 1) Replication 2) High-availability configuration 3) Point-in-time recovery (PITR) 4) Import/export in CSV format
- hueving 10y agoWhat's the different between PITR and a volume snapshot restoration?
- scardine 10y agoPITR restores your last full backup (or snapshot) and plays the transaction log until the point in time you set so it can be very precise. Volume snapshot restoration is atomic and probably faster, but it gets you only the specific point in time where the snapshot was taken. I guess the worst case in terms of storage usage in both mechanisms are not that different, but PITR should be fully transparent performance-wise.
- JohnnyConatus 10y agoIs there a reason Google is so slow to compete with AWS? This seems like another example of where they're playing catch-up. Meanwhile, I'm blown away that Node is still just in Beta (with no SLA / deprecation guarantees) when Heroku and AWS have supported it for years.
- lobster_johnson 10y agoThey're playing catch-up in some areas, but in others (networking, containers, pub/sub, BigQuery, authentication, CLI tools), they're ahead (and AWS is far behind). Whereas AWS aggressively targets the more traditional enterprise stacks (like running a big single-node RDBMS in the cloud), Google seems to give priority to more modern, decentralized tech.
- meddlepal 10y agoIt seems Google is very interested in making GCP a platform for companies that really need to build cloud-based distributed systems first and foremost. It's a cloud-native IaaS platform. AWS, which I also use extensively FWIW, has always felt more like a platform for porting existing on-premise applications onto. You can build atop of AWS at any stage of the game, but it never quite feels like it's anymore than a bunch of very integrated parts with various degrees of quality.
- lobster_johnson 10y agoYes, exactly.
- bsg75 10y agoUsing the example I have worked with, BigQuery, it appears Google is building platforms specifically for the cloud. BQ does not use the context of an instance, whereas RedShift is simply a column store hosted on specific VM sizes. It takes time to build new solutions compared to simply moving the hosting location. I don't expect this is universal across all products, but one example.
- cvburgess 10y agoDoes anyone have a good comparison between this, RDS, Aurora, Citus, Heroku PG and some of the other Postgres (and "Postgres-compatible") services? With so many DBaaS tools available, I'd like to know the best options for things like pricing, availability, features, tooling, monitoring, etc...
- tjpaudio 10y agoI feel like this is going to be an increasingly hard question to answer as more and more cloud providers with interchangeable services become available. It's like buying a car. You will run into someone that has used 2 or 3 different providers of the same service, but some one with hands on experience with them all, unlikely.
- pykello 10y agoI think use-case for Google Cloud SQL, RDS, Heroku, etc is a bit different from Citus and other distributed databases. It seems that Cloud SQL has very limited scalibility (32 processors, 200GB of RAM), so it might not be very good at usecases that your working dataset is in order of terabytes or more. Citus on the other hand has horizontal scalability and you can add more CPU power and RAM by adding another machine to your machines. If my data were at order of 10GBs, I would choose Cloud SQL, RDS, etc. At order of 100GBs, I would try both Cloud SQL, RDS, etc. and Citus, etc. to see which one fits my usecase. At order of terabytes, I would choose Citus or some other distributed database. (I'm a former Citus employee and Current Googler in a non-Cloud SQL team)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- brandur 10y agoSo this will be far from exhaustive but ... Both RDS and Heroku are aimed more at more modestly sized database in that you don't really scale beyond the vertical capacity of a single node. The prices are relatively comparable with RDS starts at around $20-30 a month depending on the instance type and Heroku Postgres at $50/month. Both services will get you an HA feature that allows for better uptime through automatic node failover. Overall Heroku Postgres will probably feel a little like the Heroku platform: a little more polished and a little more "managed", but with fewer knobs to tweak, which can be both good and bad depending on your situation. It's too early to say how Google's offering will shape up, but it'll likely be in the same vein as these first two. Lack of HA probably means that you should limit your production use of it, although it seems that the team intends to implement that eventually based off the service's documentation and other comments here. Citus and Aurora come into play when you're looking to scale beyond a single node. Citus Cloud starts at $990 a month so you're not likely to come into it without some non-trivial requirements. Aurora is similar idea. Citus' killer feature over something like Aurora is that instead of going ahead and forking Postgres wholesale, the product runs as an extension, which means that you're likely to get better compatibility going forward with new Postgres features. Aurora is "compatible" which means that you'll be able to use psql and get access to common functionality, but are likely to see a divergence in support features. A similar situation is Redshift, which deviated around Postgres 8.0.2 [1], and at this point it's safe to say that it will never catch up. [1] http://docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift/latest/dg/c_redshift-and-postgres-sql.html http://docs.aws.amazon.com/redshift/latest/dg/c_redshift-and...
- knz 10y agoDoes anyone know if it supports PostGIS? I'm not seeing much on the page (on mobile).
- oomkiller 10y agoYes Disclosure: Not a Google Employee, and I don't work on Cloud SQL
- hizanberg 10y agoAwesome, was the main service needed before being able to consider moving from AWS - let the cloud wars begin!
- crudbug 10y agoPromising. Is Google contributing anything back into Postgres codebase ? They could have named something different for the product - Cloud SQL ? seriously.
- lobster_johnson 10y agoCloud SQL is Google's counterpart to RDS. They support both Postgres and MySQL. From what I've heard, Google is running a vanilla version of Postgres. They don't offer any features beyond what mainline Postgres provides (unlike AWS Aurora, which runs modified versions versions of MySQL and Postgres).
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- justinclift 10y ago> Is Google contributing anything back into Postgres codebase ? As a general thought, it's probably be a good idea to wait (say) 6 months until this new Cloud SQL for PG offering has matured + their team has more PG experience. Places often contribute back to upstream projects as they get more involved in relevant Community, and it sounds like they're just starting out now.
- ww520 10y agoGood news. More competition the better.
- rattray 10y agoBecause my first question was "What are the deviations from standard Postgres?": https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/features#differences-pg https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/features#differences-pg It looks like there aren't many – you can't use SUPERUSER, and they enable extensions, options, and parameters one by one at request.
- tomaskafka 10y ago5 GB database with 2 GB RAM for $132/month (tier D4)? Seriously, who is this for? I have no idea - SSD VPS like this is about $10/mo ...
- tdumitrescu 10y ago$10 + the very non-trivial cost of administering it yourself.
- a012 10y agoFor micro scale self-managed Postgres, what's difference? Keep in mind that GCP doesn't support HA (ye)t and has not guaranteed anything.
- marcell 10y ago5 GB is included storage, additional is available for $0.24 per GB per month. Still, this doesn't seem competitive with AWS. The same money buys you substantially more RAM: https://aws.amazon.com/rds/pricing/ https://aws.amazon.com/rds/pricing/ Edit: sibling comment points out the actual pricing for google is lower.
- bbatsell 10y agoThat is pricing for 1st Generation, which is a whole different product that does not support Postgres. The pricing for Postgres is here: https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/pricing#pg-pricing https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/pricing#pg-pricin... (1*0.0413+2*0.0070)*730 + 5*0.17 = $41.22/month 1 vCPU 2GB RAM 5GB SSD
- tomaskafka 10y agoThanks for the computation - looks a bit more sane, but still - seems pretty expensive compared to a cheap VPS for the one-man-show scale, and quite expensive for 'we need 100s of those' compared with standalone server.
- no1youknowz 10y agoAny chance of seeing pipelinedb being supported?
- chacham15 10y agoDoes this use Vitess? Are those two competing products?
- daenney 10y ago> Vitess is a database clustering system for horizontal scaling of MySQL. So probably not, since this is about supporting Postgres on Cloud SQL.
- sougou 10y agoRight. Vitess was built by YouTube to solve its own scalability problems. It provides sharding and cluster-management functionality. In a way, it's orthogonal. We've talked about the possibility of making Vitess work on top of CloudSQL. Maybe it will happen some day.
- elvinyung 10y agoSounds like that might take a bite out of the market for Spanner :P
- caleblloyd 10y agoWill it be available in the same private network as the rest of our GCE VMs? Last I checked, Google Cloud MySQL runs over the public network, which is a big pain in the ass for access control.
- rvs-ie 10y agoNo, it's currently public IP only.
- dvnguyen 10y agoOne thing is really strange in this thread is that almost every opinion against Google's customer support are down voted heavily. Google advocates always say that GCP support is better. Of course they have to be better because they are the underdog in the cloud war. I can't buy the logic that GCP is Google but not that Google. What would happen if they could dominate? Don't get me wrong. GCP as a product is really awesome. I've been using GCE and Datastore for a project and they just work. I just can't trust Google enough to bring all my works to their cloud.
- JimDabell 10y agoMaybe because there's a lot of people here who have positive experiences? If GCP has good support, then comments claiming otherwise based on nothing but generalisations of Google's support for other products should be down voted – untrue claims don't add to the conversation, they detract from it.
- lobster_johnson 10y agoProbably because it's something that comes up in every discussion about GCP, just like Go and generics. And some of these comments are pretty useless. Like this [1] one. What's even the point? If you can't offer anything interesting, not even an anecdotal data point about reliability, why even contribute? There's every sign that Google is serious about their IaaS. For example, Google is already dogfooding GCP heavily. According to googlers, a bunch of public Google products run on GCP. Also, it's worth mentioning that GCP support is very good these days. Sure, Google is no longer non-evil, and they are deservedly notorious for killing products, but GCP is a different category altogether. They deserve being given the benefit of the doubt in this case, especially as IaaS world really benefits from competition. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13831966 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13831966
- lern_too_spel 10y agoWhat Google products run on GCP? That's news to me. I would think they would have announced that in the keynote.
- mastazi 10y agoYour turn, Azure https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/suggestions/8300487-mysql-and-postgresql-as-daas-from-ms-like-an-azur https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/sugges... https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/suggestions/8403264-offer-postgresql-as-a-paas-daas-service-not-via-a https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/sugges... https://feedback.azure.com/forums/170024-additional-services/suggestions/6814490-drop-cleardb-and-develop-a-native-azure-mysql-comp https://feedback.azure.com/forums/170024-additional-services... PS: managed MySQL is currently the most requested additional service on Azure: https://feedback.azure.com/forums/170024-additional-services/filters/top https://feedback.azure.com/forums/170024-additional-services... .. and managed Postgres + MySQL are currently the third most requested feature in relation to their managed DB offering https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/filters/top https://feedback.azure.com/forums/217321-sql-database/filter...
- rjcrystal 10y agoI just met an azure representative in a event and they said managed mysql is in private beta right now. It will take them around 3 months to get it out if it. Even I'm waiting for it
- mastazi 10y agoThat is great news as I'm probably going to use it in a large project that will start in a few months...
- sjellis 10y agoI really would not recommend Azure unless you are going for an all-Microsoft, all-the-time strategy. Their hosted SQL Server offerings have actually been really good, and IMO is one of the best parts of the platform.
- jlian 10y agoWould love to hear more about your opinions on the first part.
- executive 10y agoThe day before I was about to migrate to RDS. Change of plans!
- a012 10y agoWhy change? Because GCloud hype or because cost? I'd stick to AWS RDS because GCloud Postgres is still in beta as they highlighted.
- rebelidealist 10y agoDoes this support hstore and Json store?
- manigandham 10y agoYes. hstore is an available extension, json is a built-in datatype. https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions https://cloud.google.com/sql/docs/postgres/extensions
- andrewdryga 10y agoIt would be awesome to see pglogical in the list of supported extensions, which can help to deal with replication for now.