IBM Cloud Databases are open source data stores for enterprise application development. Built on a Kubernetes foundation, they offer a database platform for serverless applications. They are designed to scale storage and compute resources seamlessly without being constrained by the limits of a single server. Natively integrated and available in the IBM Cloud console, these databases are now available through a consistent consumption, pricing, and interaction model. They aim to provide a cohesive…
N/A
PostgreSQL
Score 8.8 out of 10
N/A
PostgreSQL (alternately Postgres) is a free and open source object-relational database system boasting over 30 years of active development, reliability, feature robustness, and performance. It supports SQL and is designed to support various workloads flexibly.
N/A
Pricing
IBM Cloud Databases
PostgreSQL
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
IBM Cloud Databases
PostgreSQL
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
IBM Cloud Databases
PostgreSQL
Considered Both Products
IBM Cloud Databases
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose IBM Cloud Databases
When launching the system, using multiple services would have been inefficient, so we consolidated it on IBM Cloud Databases. We regularly compared the services provided by IBM Cloud Databases' PaaS with those of other cloud services, but decided that there was no need to go to …
a powerful storm disrupted power supplies and network connections to the data center hosting our critical databases. Despite the external factors causing widespread service disruptions, IBM Cloud Databases demonstrated its exceptional reliability. The auto-failover feature …
UI is easier to use and flexible. AWS EBS is very simple to use and do upgrades and monitor the upgrades easily. I also recommend IBM to implement these.
The reason why I choose IBM Cloud Databases is that the IBM cloud toolset is already being used in other functions of the company and by using IBM Cloud Databases, the other cloud tools are better embedded and integrated. If the company is set to use amazon tools, I would go …
IBM cloud database has a lot of features than amazon dynamodb. This is my personal opinion. But I can't say amazon dynamodb is a bad one. But IBM cloud database has a lot of securities and file storage and backup features than amazon dynamodb. But both are good in their own …
I have used Amazon DynamoDm and compared to IBM Compose, I would say IBM Compose is affordable, easy to use and very fast as well. I would opt IBM Cloud Databases given the two choices
they do a great job at handling our business needs. we like what they offer and how they respond to questions we provide. they do a lot of great things that help our business thrive and stay ahead. we are grateful for how this compnay has responded to our unique requests and …
We already had existing contracts with IBM and Microsoft, so those made the most sense to verify. Both are good options for data storage. Since much of our existing Dbs are IBM related, we stuck with IBM cloud dbs, just so that the SQL code would port well. Additionally, we …
The kubernete service is the front end for the transactions of our core systems and our cloud databases (Postgres and DB2) are the persistence storage.
It is very similar to the way on which we operated before except that we don't have to worry about high availability, backups …
AWS RDS & Oracle OCI. AWS RDS has a wider range of databases but at a higher cost. IBM Compose has fewer databases but is perfect for data related solutions like data warehousing (IBM Db2 AI enabled Warehouse is a GREAT product!)
Cloudant is HIPAA compliant and replicated out of the box. We recommend use of Cloudant vs Mongodb for that purpose. We use Redis only as a session cache.
We have Cassandra database that is currently not available as part of IBM Cloud Databases. We ended up using classic infrastructure IaaS to host our Cassandra server.
I did compare IBM Compose for PostgreSQL with PostgreSQL offerings available from Amazon and Google. IBM Compose was judged easier to provision and maintain.
I'm pleased with the additional more granular provisioning flexibility and more favorable cost structure that has come …
While at the time, Amazon RDS did/does not create Mongo databases, I was able to set up many with PostgreSQL databases with the same ease as IBM Compose. However, IBM compose does seem to offer a more intuitive application control panel. Amazon RDS costs run on a server …
We selected Compose because we initially thought that they would provide great support, and that they would bring encryption at rest within months. That has not materialized yet.
We also thought that the cost, while far from being the lowest, was reasonable.
My expirence with other solutions is very limited, but what I saw/heard is, that on Azure the managed MS SQL Server is said to be more flexible and you can use it in a serverless-ish fashion. But on the other hand, PostgresSQL is still strong regarding its efficiency. And in my …
Being open source, PostgreSQL offers the highest performance among its peers. It has a strong support community where we can find solutions to most of the queries. It's suited for GIS (Geospatial) based applications, making it unique from its peers. There are fewer databases …
PostgreSQL holds it own against both these options. Some of these DBs are in play for certain needs but the majority are PostgreSQL because of cost and operational performance.
In my experience using all of these products over many years, PostgreSQL is better than any of them in reliability, performance, productivity, cost, scalability and interoperability across operating systems.
MySQL is an Oracle product which has in itself some known issues due to that (support, contract terms). Based on my knowledge, PostgreSQL support everything that MySQL support (syntax wise) and it adds more improvements and syntaxes that make the life of database engineers and …
First It's open source and it's cost-effective compared to other databases.PostgreSQL can be easily integrated with numerous platforms. It is well known and appreciated so relying on it as our system database can be easily accepted by our customers. And if your developing a …
For our use cases, PostgreSQL is just as feature rich as other options, costs less, and is simple to get up and running. There is also a plethora of documentation to support it which makes it a great option for a small scale startup without needing high levels of expertise to …
In this case, Postgres is preferred because it handles large data sets and requires fewer hardware resources than its competitor, MySQL. Compared to PostgreSQL, Microsoft products are excellent, but the installation process for MS SQL is lengthy. PostgreSQL has an advantage …
I've been using different databases for the past 20 years, solutions like MS SQL Server, MySQL, MariaDB, Interbase, Firebird, DB2, etc., and by using them I wasn't able to be neither close to the performance PostgreSQL deliver. Also, it is one of the most popular databases on …
Although the competition between the different databases is increasingly aggressive in the sense that they provide many improvements, new functionalities, compatibility with complementary components or environments, in some cases it requires that it be followed within the same …
We evaluated both PostgreSQL and MySQL, two popular open source relational databases. While they are very similar in most areas, PostgreSQL's reliability and performance won us over, plus it has much better support from cloud vendors we also work with.
Postgres stacks up just [fine] along the other big players in the RDBMS world. It's very popular for a reason. It's very close to mySQL in terms of cost and features - I'd pick either solution and be just as happy. Compared to Oracle it is a MUCH cheaper solution that is just …
A free corporate professional product. Who does not want to have such a thing, we hesitated because we did not know the product before and frankly we did not want it at first. But when we give it a chance, it has been running smoothly for years.
When we were originally evaluating Redshift we ran into some issue with dates. Either way, Postgres is a better choice than Redshift because it avoids vendor lockin. We ended up choosing Postgres over MySQL because it was easier at the time to get a hosted Postgres cluster up …
As I have been telling all along, PostgreSQL is much cheaper compared to the other RDBMS solutions. It has got better performance with some of the application services that we are using and is easy to maintain. Overall, we are satisfied migrating to PostgreSQL database clusters.
Much more mature and stable when compared to MySQL with features such as MVCC, complex subquery plans, ORDBMS, and NoSQL support. With Oracle retaining rights to MySQL its future as an open database is less secure and is no longer in the hands of the community. PostgreSQL also …
Its main characteristic is the integrity of the data. In addition, being free software, it has no costs associated with its license, which allows the number of installations to be scaled without problems.
The technical staff quickly learns about its installation, configuration …
Both Oracle and MS-SQL database option fell when we evaluated the effect on our overall solution cost to our customers. customer examine the overall cost of the solution they buy, selecting Oracle or MS-SQL would leave less money in our pockets. We are Linux based solutions and …
PostgrPostgreSQL as a transaction db engine against oracle and sql server works well. TPM wise compared to MySQL and MariaDB, on an evan scale. SQL function supports, far outweighs compared to MySQL and MariaDB. PG Extensions allow for flexibiltity and scalability. Allows …
We selected PostgreSQL due to the number of employees who have used it in the past. The data consistency guarantees. The multiple transaction isolation levels support.
PostgreSQL outperforms every other option. It is faster, more flexible, more reliable, easier to maintain, and more consistent in behaviour than any of the other offerings.
The main reason for select PostgreSQL against MS SQL Server Express edition is the necessity to use open-source platform, without any issues for licensing, client licensing, etc. etc, which is usually follows developers and project managers when they start to use products and …
Less Appropriate Scenario: 1) Small Scale or Low Budget Projects 2) Organizations with limited expertise in cloud technologies may find the learning curve steep, especially if they are not familiar with the IBM Cloud platform 3) If database requirements are highly dynamic and change frequently, the comprehensive features and management provided by IBM Cloud Databases might be overkill. A more flexible, self-managed solution could be preferable for adapting to rapid changes.
Based on my experience, PostgreSQL is exactly what I imagine when thinking of a relational database: it is fast for querying and intuitive (if the underlying relations have been well written) and its writes are also efficient. Of course you need to know that a relational database is what you need, for example I would not recommend it if you have a lot of unstructured data that have no way to create a relation from and if you need to run heavy aggregations over your data, as it is not where PostgreSQL would shine.
The ease of setup was effortless. For anyone with development experience, a few simple questions such as name and login data will get you set up.
The web application to manage cluster settings, billing settings and even introspect the data was simple and most importantly worked all the time. This can not always be said for web interfaces of other products.
The stability it offers, its speed of response and its resource management is excellent even in complex database environments and with low-resource machines.
The large amount of resources it has in addition to the many own and third-party tools that are compatible that make productivity greatly increase.
The adaptability in various environments, whether distributed or not, [is a] complete set of configuration options which allows to greatly customize the work configuration according to the needs that are required.
The excellent handling of referential and transactional integrity, its internal security scheme, the ease with which we can create backups are some of the strengths that can be mentioned.
Better cost reports, before just increasing to another tier, thus increasing the price. This is critical for early stage startups, where budget is tight.
Add more data center options. As a comparison, a similar service, Aiven.io has dozen more options than Compose (basically all big cloud providers). We moved from AWS to Digital Ocean, which made us stop using Compose, since Compose forces us to be either on IBM or AWS.
The query syntax for JSON fields is unwieldy when you start getting into complex queries with many joins.
I wish there was a distinction (a flag) you could set for automated scripts vs working in the psql CLI, which would provide an 'Are you sure you want to do X?' type prompt if your query is likely to affect more than a certain number of rows. Especially on updates/deletes. Setting the flag in the headless(scripted) flow would disable the prompt.
Better documentation around JSON and Array aggregation, with more examples of how the data is transformed.
IBM Cloud Databases' pricing structure is easy to understand, and if you choose the right product, you can operate your system at minimal cost. Although there is ample documentation available, there doesn't seem to be a user community running on it, so specific usage know-how and troubleshooting can sometimes take longer than expected.
Postgresql is the best tool out there for relational data so I have to give it a high rating when it comes to analytics, data availability and consistency, so on and so forth. SQL is also a relatively consistent language so when it comes to building new tables and loading data in from the OLTP database, there are enough tools where we can perform ETL on a scalable basis.
The data queries are relatively quick for a small to medium sized table. With complex joins, and a wide and deep table however, the performance of the query has room for improvement.
Support is helpful enough, but we haven't always had questions answered in a satisfactory manner. At one time we realized that Compose had stopped taking database snapshots on its two-per-day schedule, and had in fact not taken one for many days. Support recognized the problem and it was fixed, but the lack of proactive checks and the inability to share exactly what happened has caused us to look elsewhere for production work loads
There are several companies that you can contract for technical support, like EnterpriseDB or Percona, both first level in expertise and commitment to the software.
But we do not have contracts with them, we have done all the way from googling to forums, and never have a problem that we cannot resolve or pass around. And for dozens of projects and more than 15 years now.
The online training is request based. Had there been recorded videos available online for potential users to benefit from, I could have rated it higher. The online documentation however is very helpful. The online documentation PDF is downloadable and allows users to pace their own learning. With examples and code snippets, the documentation is great starting point.
The reason why I choose IBM Cloud Databases is that the IBM cloud toolset is already being used in other functions of the company and by using IBM Cloud Databases, the other cloud tools are better embedded and integrated. If the company is set to use amazon tools, I would go for rds.
In my experience using all of these products over many years, PostgreSQL is better than any of them in reliability, performance, productivity, cost, scalability and interoperability across operating systems.