Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I mostly agree with this comment. Oracle makes a fantastic RDBMS (so does Microsoft, if we're talking about expensive enterprise RDBMS), but while Postgres has caught up with a lot of the more important features, I disagree with your conclusion.

For many organisations, the licensing costs of an Oracle or Microsoft RDBMS are trivial compared to the costs of the projects they're supporting, and it's easy to find where the value might be. Everything that's difficult about running an RDBMS at scale (clustering, failover/replication, statistics collection, plan management, monitoring, online index rebuilding, table partitioning...) is easier with the features and management tools those companies provide. Add actually decent support to that, and you've got a very clear value proposition.

A Postgres instance will require a lot more hands on management, and a deeper understanding of how the database engine works. At smaller scale, these factors are much less likely to cause problems, and many organisations are unlikely to ever reach actually large scales (many TB instance, running hundreds or thousands of transactions per second). But if you want to start scaling an RDBMS application up, you're going to have to confront those costs in one way or another. After a point, licensing expensive features can start to look better than deploying more specialised labor.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: