2 ms·

PG is far better than Mysql, something to note if you come from a traditional but robust RDBMS/environment.

• wst_ 10y ago
  Do you have anything to back up this opinion?
  • mamcx 10y ago
    The article of this HN already cover that (plus the others that the original post also point)... But because this is about someone coming from a more traditional RDBMS (like oracle, sql server, sybase) it will note that some or most of the features of PG are not different from something like them. Also, PG was from the start more focused in be robust, instead of MySql that was focused in be fast (at the cost of being robust). PG is a better fit for more traditional workloads from years now. And the careful, well-thought, solid development, feature implementation and release discipline is clearly very professional, to match the ones from commercial vendors. PG is not just good for startups and enthusiasts, but solid enough to be recommended to most companies with total confidence.
    • wst_ 10y ago
      I've got a feeling that MySQL has improved a lot. I have nothing besides my experience as a user (not an admin) to back it up, but I haven't found anything that would make me switch from MySQL to PG. Note that I don't look down on PG. I've used it in the past and it is a solid piece. It's just the feeling that both of them covers most users' needs and, apart from some corner cases, they are more or less equal.