3 ms·
> It's rarely a mistake to start with Postgres and then switch out the most performance critical parts of your system when the time comes. This is pretty good
by davidw 7y ago
> It's rarely a mistake to start with Postgres and then switch out the most performance critical parts of your system when the time comes.
This is pretty good advice in general.
- Thaxll 7y agoAdding postgres there and there where it's clearly the wrong tool is a bad advice.
- xmprt 7y agoI probably would have gone with something like Kafka in this case, but it seems like Postgres serves them pretty well even if it's the "wrong" tool. If it works, fits your current needs, leads to faster development time, and isn't needlessly slow, then I say go for it.
- privateSFacct 7y agoI have some light experience with this. If you have the PostgreSQL hammer you sometimes think - I really should be using something else, but this hammer works with a lot of nails - and the use cases that postgresql works well enough on keep increasing.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- lallysingh 7y agoAnd also super easy to administer, replicate, back up, monitor, and test with.
- rumanator 7y agoPicking Postgres for alternative applications such as pub/sub services also simplifies both deployment and development. You'll already be using Postgres for persistence, so why waste time deploying another set of services and develop another set of clients just to get the same functionalities?
- wheelerwj 7y agoif it were clearly the wrong tool, you'd be right. But its clearly not the wrong tool for this specific situation.
- earthboundkid 7y agoPG is the default database. You can use something else if you need it, but PG is where you default to start with.