Postgres vs. MSSQL

Gabriel Gunderson gabe at
Wed Nov 8 10:38:58 MST 2006

On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 09:58 -0700, Daniel C. wrote:
> At work here we're looking at whether to adopt Postgres or stay with
> MS SQL.  We've already got MS SQL working and all that, so switching
> would mean throwing out our licenses with MS and porting the DBs (more
> than one) over.  On the other hand, we're looking at growing soon, and
> I'm worried that MS won't scale very well.  (Plus I like Postgres
> better.  But our DBA likes MS SQL better.)

While I don't like it, MSSQL is a pretty solid database.  Like
everything else, it has its warts.  It can be difficult work moving
databases.  If you already have the license for MS *and* you have
working databases, then it might be cheaper to just stay.  As expensive
as they are, you don't hear of people chucking licenses that often.  I
do know that CALs can add up fast - so watch out.

I love PostgreSQL and think it's great, but depending on what your idea
of "scaling" is, you may need to look into the current state of PG
replication and make sure it will suite your needs.

> I'm also going to recommend moving to Django from PHP, which would
> make Postgres the natural option.

I've never really gotten into PHP.  I can say that I like Django, but I
don't know if I can suggest it for complex databases yet.

> Anyone have a perspective on this they could share?  Things I need to
> consider?  Potential arguments for both sides of the issue?

I've blogged about my django experience here:

More information about the PLUG mailing list