7 ms·

So, a part of Microsoft will advocate for SQL server, and another part will develop for PostgreSQL? Isn't it weird? Why would Microsoft want this?

brokensegue 8y ago
for azure?
- rockker 8y ago
  It is all about choice. As both AWS and Azure user, I can attest that Microsoft is doing a lot more with OSS and contributing than AWS. We are both a SQL Server and PostgreSQL shop and are excited about this move by Microsoft and Citus.
the_common_man 8y ago
Same thing as Oracle owning MySQL. Keep your friends close but enemies closer.
adventured 8y ago
For a similar business reason as to why Azure offers Linux, Microsoft develops for Android and iPhone and Oracle owns MySQL. Microsoft doesn't regard PostgreSQL as a direct threat to SQL Server and it's happy to make money where it can so long as it doesn't perceive something to be a mortal threat.
- rockker 8y ago
  That is what I am observing too.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
giancarlostoro 8y ago
Azure gives you Linux and Windows as options for hosting, because money is money and engineers are not free.
jerrysievert 8y ago
hosted postgres is already available on azure, ala rds.
Dangeranger 8y ago
Because MS is more and more in the business of selling the operation of software as a service, instead of selling licenses for their customers to operate themselves. Think of them like a wedding event rental company, they are more than happy to rent you their own brand of tables, flatware, and silverware, but if you want another brand that’s fine too as long is you buy from them.
nradov 8y ago
Microsoft is hedging their bets. PostgreSQL has the potential to disrupt the traditional relational database market, so if they're going to be disrupted then better to do it themselves. I expect they'll also try to port Citus Data functionality to the SQL Server platform.
- jolmg 8y ago
  Disrupt how? Haven't they been part of the traditional relational database market for years now? What's changing?
  - Dangeranger 8y ago
    People outside open source are noticing. Also PostgreSQL has improved by large margins in the last five years. The software is more akin to a pyramid rather than a skyscraper. The foundation took a long time, but now that its complete there is a strong base for growth.
    - signal11 8y ago
      It's a little bit like Linux in the late 90s. Postgres is increasingly being used in financial services, for instance, because it's "good enough" -- many teams really don't need Oracle's or SQL Server's feature-set, and Postgres has enough 'interesting' features of its own. It also lets teams own their DB infrastructure and play around with deployment patterns that'd make little sense on Oracle et al because of cost reasons. It's not that Postgres is "killing" commercial databases, it's just that more and more people are, as you said, noticing that they don't need a commercial database for lots of use cases. And support and consultancy -- and even in-team skills -- for Postgres are often available.
  - abraae 8y ago
    Shifts in the database world happen at a glacial pace. They've been a part of that world for a long time yes, but they're steadily becoming more and more legit and acceptable as an alternative to Oracle, SQL server.
- 8y ago
samfisher83 8y ago
Why did Facebook buy Instagram? Look at all the various travel sites. They are all owned by priceline.
manigandham 8y ago
Offering services is far more lucrative than a single product. That's the entire cloud computing business model. Azure is happy to take your money to run SQL Server or Postgres, just like how Amazon has been running Aurora side-by-side with Oracle and SQL Server for years now.
bdcravens 8y ago
Same reason why Microsoft wants libraries for languages like Ruby to talk to SQL Server (at the cost of ASP.net adoption - I had the pleasure of speaking to that team at RubyConf one year) or to run SQL Server on Linux (at the cost of Windows licenses). Expanding their breadth benefits the company overall, and they know there will be some who never run SQL Server or Windows, yet 2019 Microsoft wants to have solutions for those folks.
z3t4 8y ago
If you could switch from Oracle, you would switch to mySQL, thus oracle buys mySQL to keep control of the enterprise market.. If you could switch from MS SQL you would probably switch to PostgreSQL, thus MS wants to control part of the PostgreSQL enterprise market. If you would switch from Facebook, you would probably go to Instagram. Whatever you choose, the money will end up in the same pocket.
heroprotagonist 8y ago
They shifted a lot of focus to Azure. Azure Database for PostgreSQL competes against RDS and to a lesser extent, Google's Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL. They'll still sell MS SQL Server too. But sometimes PostgreSQL is a better fit for your stack, or your preference, and they want your money for them to provide that too.

brokensegue 8y ago

for azure?

rockker 8y ago
It is all about choice. As both AWS and Azure user, I can attest that Microsoft is doing a lot more with OSS and contributing than AWS. We are both a SQL Server and PostgreSQL shop and are excited about this move by Microsoft and Citus.

the_common_man 8y ago

Same thing as Oracle owning MySQL. Keep your friends close but enemies closer.

adventured 8y ago

For a similar business reason as to why Azure offers Linux, Microsoft develops for Android and iPhone and Oracle owns MySQL. Microsoft doesn't regard PostgreSQL as a direct threat to SQL Server and it's happy to make money where it can so long as it doesn't perceive something to be a mortal threat.

rockker 8y ago
That is what I am observing too.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

giancarlostoro 8y ago

Azure gives you Linux and Windows as options for hosting, because money is money and engineers are not free.

jerrysievert 8y ago

hosted postgres is already available on azure, ala rds.

Dangeranger 8y ago

Because MS is more and more in the business of selling the operation of software as a service, instead of selling licenses for their customers to operate themselves. Think of them like a wedding event rental company, they are more than happy to rent you their own brand of tables, flatware, and silverware, but if you want another brand that’s fine too as long is you buy from them.

nradov 8y ago

Microsoft is hedging their bets. PostgreSQL has the potential to disrupt the traditional relational database market, so if they're going to be disrupted then better to do it themselves. I expect they'll also try to port Citus Data functionality to the SQL Server platform.

jolmg 8y ago
Disrupt how? Haven't they been part of the traditional relational database market for years now? What's changing?
- Dangeranger 8y ago
  People outside open source are noticing. Also PostgreSQL has improved by large margins in the last five years. The software is more akin to a pyramid rather than a skyscraper. The foundation took a long time, but now that its complete there is a strong base for growth.
  - signal11 8y ago
    It's a little bit like Linux in the late 90s. Postgres is increasingly being used in financial services, for instance, because it's "good enough" -- many teams really don't need Oracle's or SQL Server's feature-set, and Postgres has enough 'interesting' features of its own. It also lets teams own their DB infrastructure and play around with deployment patterns that'd make little sense on Oracle et al because of cost reasons. It's not that Postgres is "killing" commercial databases, it's just that more and more people are, as you said, noticing that they don't need a commercial database for lots of use cases. And support and consultancy -- and even in-team skills -- for Postgres are often available.
- abraae 8y ago
  Shifts in the database world happen at a glacial pace. They've been a part of that world for a long time yes, but they're steadily becoming more and more legit and acceptable as an alternative to Oracle, SQL server.
8y ago

samfisher83 8y ago

Why did Facebook buy Instagram? Look at all the various travel sites. They are all owned by priceline.

manigandham 8y ago

Offering services is far more lucrative than a single product. That's the entire cloud computing business model. Azure is happy to take your money to run SQL Server or Postgres, just like how Amazon has been running Aurora side-by-side with Oracle and SQL Server for years now.

bdcravens 8y ago

Same reason why Microsoft wants libraries for languages like Ruby to talk to SQL Server (at the cost of ASP.net adoption - I had the pleasure of speaking to that team at RubyConf one year) or to run SQL Server on Linux (at the cost of Windows licenses). Expanding their breadth benefits the company overall, and they know there will be some who never run SQL Server or Windows, yet 2019 Microsoft wants to have solutions for those folks.

z3t4 8y ago

If you could switch from Oracle, you would switch to mySQL, thus oracle buys mySQL to keep control of the enterprise market.. If you could switch from MS SQL you would probably switch to PostgreSQL, thus MS wants to control part of the PostgreSQL enterprise market. If you would switch from Facebook, you would probably go to Instagram. Whatever you choose, the money will end up in the same pocket.

heroprotagonist 8y ago

They shifted a lot of focus to Azure. Azure Database for PostgreSQL competes against RDS and to a lesser extent, Google's Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL. They'll still sell MS SQL Server too. But sometimes PostgreSQL is a better fit for your stack, or your preference, and they want your money for them to provide that too.