PostgreSQL Reviews

PostgreSQL is great for all types of data storage needs. Even if you have a use case for minor document storage, it can handle it. As with most things, you use the right tool for the job, anywhere you would use MySQL or SQL Server, you can just swap in PostgreSQL. However, if you are needing a NoSQL or schema-less storage model, look elsewhere.

If you're using C# and other products from Microsoft then you get a lot of benefit from Microsoft SQL Server and the Entity Framework ORM. However if you're building an app in almost anything else, then there is almost guaranteed PostgreSQL tooling, utilities or packages for that environment, it's a great database to use.

PostgreSQL is indicated for companies with a large database that requires the maximum database manager and needs to squeeze all its benefits. It is not recommended for use in small databases or ones with a low level of transactions, many of which will be lost. Those are benefits of this application, and there are options that can provide better results.

One thing that I/my companies use it for and that it is most frequently used for is applications with some sort of API. Storage and retrieval is very fast and performant, and the data types (including JSON natively) bring together the best aspects of traditional SQL databases and newer NoSQL databases (ie. MongoDB and others)

The use case I am using it for - I have recommended to several entities: it's a good way to quickly get information out of an MBOX file format (which contains a lot of unstructured data).

1. Open source and object relational
2. Great community
3. New versions for every six months and very stable
4. Support for JSON, XML and Geospatial

PostgreSQL supports most of standard SQL, which is almost same as other SQL servers, and it has wide variety of features that are not present in other SQL servers. PostgreSQL has database drivers readily available for popular web programming languages like PHP, Python, Java, and C#. PgAdmin makes it easy for people who likes to work with it's GUI, even though it's not the best yet. There are many companies that provide enterprise level support and many SaaS and PaaS providers which makes it even more easier to migrate and get support.

Only case where it might not suit is for companies that want to implement themselves and don't have enough expertise in doing so. That's because PostgreSQL is extremely powerful despite its size.

I have used it as a data warehouse, client specific database for a web application, test systems where each developer has their own schema for testing, local application database, and as a remote application database. It has worked well in each of these situations. Currently the main area where I would not use PostgreSQL is when I need an embedded database - in which case I would look at something like SQLite or other.

Postgres is best suited as an OLTP database, and even for non-huge OLAP use cases. We especially love the third-party extensions to PG that make the database a clear winner amongst open source databases. When evaluating PG, look beyond traditional RDBMS workloads and also into areas where NOSQL databases have use cases. With PG's support for the JSON and JSONB data types, PG is now a competitor on the schema-less database space.

From small to huge databases, PostgreSQL is the best solution for every industry.

PostgreSQL is very good for quick projects with structured data. It allows for easy schema development for complex relational structures and also for document storage (using JSON-encoding for documents). The query model against these nested JSON structures is amazing!

If looking for a strict document database, though, PostgreSQL might be overkill when compared to tools like DynamoDB.

It works better if you need JSON support. It's very fast and a little more complicated than MySQL especially with query planning. It's bad on keeping space usage small [for] dump/restore. The whole db shrank out 6TB DB to 2TB. Any large project I would definitely pick postgres just in case more advanced stuff is wanted later.

If you want to use it to store your operational data in the records, PostgreSQL will do best. It has a lot of great features. When it comes to analytics and if you have a lot of data (like in billions of rows), it is probably not a good idea. In that case, a columnar database like Vertica or Redshift will do a great job, because they are made for analytics.

PostgreSQL has handled every workload I've handed to it quite well. With proper table structuring and indexing, it handles OLTP and OLAP workloads very well. PostgreSQL is also great at isolating data if you need to ensure that one user cannot access another user's information. Row-level access controls in PostgreSQL are fantastic.

Good if we want to extend the database and use existing plugins
Good for research and academic use cases like learning database internals
Not good in places where customer support is mandatory for enterprise (as far as I know)
Not good in cases where distributed system is required for availability as there are other better distributed database systems

PostgreSQL is in my opinion the best open-source option for any enterprise-level product requiring a standard relational database. Areas where it might be considered not ideal would include: smaller-scale projects requiring a database (MySQL might be an alternative here), or document stores with unstructured data (some would argue that NoSQL options are better here).

When we have a budget constraint to buy MS SQL Server license, we can use PostgreSQL instead.

For a general purpose SQL database that is fully SQL 92 compliant, PostgreSQL is a feature rich open source database. It is underrated in this area and frequently passed over in favor of MySQL or MariaDB. PostgreSQL is more akin to SQL Server or Oracle than it is to MySQL. For general purpose applications that need some database side programming, PostgreSQL is an excellent choice.

If you need a lighter weight and trivial to configure database, MySQL is a better choice. Also, PostgreSQL sometimes is not as performant as other solutions, meaning scale and load can be issues.

We have a very high count of reads/writes and the PG database has proven to accommodate this very well. PostgreSQL also seems to be user friendly to non-DBAs. I'm no database expert but I have no problem pulling data, constructing queries and accessing the data through scripts and other tools. We also like how the database expands into the filesystem with no need to extend it.

In the noSQL arena, other providers like Firebase are creating a huge traction, mostly because of the realtime feature.

It works very well as a relational database. I think it's much better that MySQL. It supports a lot of advanced features. Also, all advanced data types are supported.
Avoid Postgres if replication is important for you. I think MySQL scores over Postgres in that regard. Both have pretty decent community and user group but I think Postgres is still behind MySQL. Could be a a little hard to find answers to uncommon questions.

It is well suited for Ruby on Rails applications based on my experience. It made creating a minimum viable product a breeze. The only issue is that it is very comparable to other free solutions without any reason to choose it as a clear winner. If you want to get a web application running quickly, you wouldn't go wrong by choosing it.