Ask Slashdot: Is Postgres On Par With Oracle?

grahamsaa writes "I work at medium sized company that offers a number of products that rely fairly heavily on backend databases, some of which are hundreds of gigabytes and deal with hundreds or thousands of queries per second. Currently, we're using a mix of Postgres, Oracle, and MySQL, though we're working hard to move everything to Postgres. The products that are still on MySQL and Oracle were acquisitions, so we didn't get to choose the RDBMS at the time these products were designed. So far, we've been very happy with Postgres, but I know next to nothing about Oracle. It's expensive and has a long history of use in large enterprises, but I'm curious about what it offers that Postgres might not — I'm not saying this because I think that sticking with Oracle would be a good idea (because in our case, it probably isn't), but I'm curious as to how some companies justify the cost — especially considering that EnterpriseDB makes transitioning from Oracle to Postgres feasible (though not painless) in most cases. For those that use Oracle — is it worth the money? What's keeping you from switching?"

Comments

Re:what keeps us from switching ?

[Darinbob]

This is the best thing about SQL: it's a standardized language letting you switch between different database vendors with fluidity.

(and how says irony is dead?)

Re:MongoDB--run away

[Billly Gates]

"Mongo is ACID compliant at the document level."

But not where it counts.

Re: What's keeping you from switching?

[Anonymous Coward]

Without whom you would likely be living in a hovel.

If your superiors decided that an Oracle solution was best, then it most likely was.

Sadly it seems you've let your jealously over compensation cloud your mind. My only advice is to remember that, when it comes to operating a business, IT workers are helpful but it is the managers who do the grunt work and take the real risks.