Hello. I'm Josh Berkus. As a consultant, I administrate both PostgreSQL and
MS SQL Server profesionally, so I decided to take your question.
> We are considering using Postgre SQL over SQL server.
That's a good first step on the road to freedom from restrictive software
> We need
> the trigger*
Which makes PostgreSQL a very good choice. Between Postgres' multiple
function languages and flexible triggers, and the RULE query-rewriting
system, PostgreSQL has the most powerful and flexible system for database
automation of any database, period.
Between MS SQL and Postgres, there is no contest. For me, it is always
horribly frustrating whenever I have to write triggers in MS SQL.
> However, I am told by a few programmers that Postgre
> operated slower*
> *than say SQL server or other database solutions in the same category.*
> *First, is there any thruth to this?
No, none whatsoever.
MS SQL does a few things faster than PostgreSQL, primarily aggregate querys.
PostgreSQL does more than a few things faster than MS SQL Server, especially
on very low-end and very high-end hardware.
> (We are assuming that all platforms run on all the same servers, hence
> have access*
> *to all the same amount of memory and processing power).*
PostgreSQL's Windows port is still being tested. If your primary goal is
performance, I strongly recommend that you test PostgreSQL on BSD, Linux, or
Good luck on your evaluation.
Aglio Database Solutions
In response to
pgsql-advocacy by date
|Next:||From: Dave Page||Date: 2003-04-24 07:10:29|
|Subject: Re: [webmaster] Case Studies Examining its Use [Dravis, 2003]|
|Previous:||From: Josh Berkus||Date: 2003-04-24 02:35:40|
|Subject: Re: Slashdot article -OSNews|