Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
api | on: Why does everyone run ancient Postgres versions?
I've always wondered why Postgres is so insanely popular. I mean it has some nice things like very powerful support for a very comprehensive subset of SQL functionality, but most apps don't need all that.

It really feels like early 1990s vintage Unix software. It's clunky and arcane and it's hard to feel confident doing anything complex with it.

tpmoney | parent | next
> I've always wondered why Postgres is so insanely popular.

In no particular order, my preference for postgres is driven by:

  * Date / time functions that don't suck
  * UTF-8 is really UTF-8
  * 99% of a backup can be done live with nothing more than rsyncing the data directory and the WAL files
  * Really comprehensive documentation
  * LTREE and fuzzy string match extensions
  * Familiarity from using it for years
MySQL/Maria I'm sure is fine, but it's one of hose things where it's just different enough and I haven't encountered a compelling use case for changing my preference.
fhdsgbbcaA | root | parent | next
UTF-8 is what made me switch. It’s insane MySQL has something called UTF-8 that isn't really UTF-8, but do have a type UTF8MB4 that actually is correct. This means if you use UFT-8 in MySQL, you can’t use emoji for example.
loading story #41875430
loading story #41876285
sgarland | root | parent
MySQL does have ON UPDATE for its DATETIME, though; something that Postgres inexplicably still lacks.
fzeindl | parent | next
* transactional DDL

* comprehensive transaction model using different modes

* PostGIS and lots of other great extensions

* supports most of the current SQL standard and is clear on interpretation of edge-cases in the documentation

* support for writing stored procedures in any major programming language

* many useful functions regarding dates, sets, ranges, json, xml, ...

* custom datatypes

* extremely thought-out and standardized approach to development: if a feature is included it generally works well in interaction with everything else

* syntax, semantics and performance are all very predictable

* great documentation

Regarding MySQL / MariaDB: MySQL optimized for performance first. Until 2010 the standard-storage-engine MyISAM didn't even support transactions.

PostgreSQL always focused on correctness and stability and then made sure everything performed.

stickfigure | parent | next
What's the alternative? MySQL? No transactional DDL, immediate fail.
jes5199 | root | parent | next
I worked for a company that migrated from mysql to postgres, but then got big enough they wanted to hire fulltime database experts and ended up migrating back to mysql because it was easier to find talent
loading story #41875436
loading story #41875533
loading story #41875636
cosmotic | root | parent | next
It's not just DDL that isn't transactional, there's a whole bunch of other things that aren't. And they break the transactionality silently. It's like an obstical course where bumping into something might be fatal.
loading story #41875779
loading story #41876552
loading story #41876770
justin_oaks | parent | next
> It really feels like early 1990s vintage Unix software. It's clunky and arcane and it's hard to feel confident doing anything complex with it.

How software "feels" is subjective. Can you be more specific?

dalyons | root | parent | next
It requires a ton of somewhat arcane maintenance at scale. Vacuum shenanigans, Index fragmentation requiring manual reindexing, Txid wraparounds. I like Postgres but it’s definitely way more work to maintain a large instance than mysql. MySQL just kinda works
threeseed | root | parent
The command line experience is old school style i.e. to show tables.

  \c database
  \dt
Versus:

  use database
  show tables
loading story #41875689
loading story #41875573
loading story #41875328
loading story #41875350
DonHopkins | parent
Because it's not tainted and cursed by Oracle, like MySQL (and Oracle).