This is HUGE!<p>I'm using the AWS stack for <a href="http://www.soundslice.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.soundslice.com/</a> and I've been using MySQL instead of Postgres, purely because my hatred for MySQL is less than my hatred for being a sysadmin. It was a tradeoff, and I miss Postgres dearly every time I use MySQL.<p>This new Amazon offering solves that.<p>I wrote a little more about my AWS setup here: <a href="http://www.holovaty.com/writing/aws-notes/" rel="nofollow">http://www.holovaty.com/writing/aws-notes/</a>
I've heard about PostgreSQL and know that HN community raves about it, but am currently using RDS with MySQL.<p>Does it make sense to migrate to PostgreSQL, I don't have a lot of data as I'm in the early stage?
What are the primary advantages that PostgreSQL provides over MySQL?
Any advise/pointers is appreciated.
I have but one suggestion. Unless RDS for PostgreSQL is drastically different from RDS for MySQL, you still need a DB administrator.<p>RDS removes remarkably little of the pain of running a database instance (most of the pain that's removed is just the up front setup), and ends up adding a lot of inconveniences for your day-to-day operations.<p>Also don't count on their replication as your backup.<p>OK. That's two suggestions, but I think it's OK.
I think this is great news... PostgreSQL is definitively my favorite open-source database. It's also nice to see Amazon get into the game, as hosted pg options have been fairly limited. I am slightly disappointed to not see the server-side JS support baked in, and that apparently you can't do reads from distributed replicas. Just the same, I think there will be a lot of progress in this area.<p>Administering databases is a full-time type of responsibility. Yes, you can get pretty sane defaults, and up and running without much difficulty with MS-SQL, and mySQL has been a defacto standard in the LAMP stack. That said PostreSQL has been a rock solid RDBMS. The commercial extensions for replication have been cumbersome and expensive. Here's hoping that AWS will grow/expand the replications options/features, and that they'll grow to include JS procs as that feature stabilizes.
Here's the announcement on the AWS blog - <a href="http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2013/11/amazon-rds-for-postgresql-now-available.html" rel="nofollow">http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2013/11/amazon-rds-for-postgresql...</a>
Great news and for people who ask them-self the questions but the version is Pg 9.3.1.<p>Not all Pl are available, and it misses the PL/V8 and PL/Python at least.<p>And it seems that all fdw (Foreign Data Wrapper) extensions are missing.<p>But it's a great start, I'm looking forward to try.<p>If anybody know if we can still access the WAL log then it will be very useful<p><a href="http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_PostgreSQL.html" rel="nofollow">http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_P...</a>
Great news! Now I don't need to setup PostgreSQL myself.<p>Here is a related whitepaper if you still want to setup PostgreSQL yourself: <a href="http://media.amazonwebservices.com/AWS_RDBMS_PostgreSQL.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://media.amazonwebservices.com/AWS_RDBMS_PostgreSQL.pdf</a>
Anyone know if the UUID type is supported? I see hstore and JSON are<p>Edit: It does, see <a href="http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_PostgreSQL.html" rel="nofollow">http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonRDS/latest/UserGuide/CHAP_P...</a>
Hmm, interesting development. But am I the only one to see a huge gap in services between Amazon and Heroku, and one which most certainly bodes bad for Heroku? Specifically, with Heroku's recent PG 2.0 service, their 'production grade' Standard plan ranges from $50 - $3500, but "Up to 1 hr downtime per mo." ?!?1! Huh, really, with up to an hour downtime /month, you couldn't be serious about the product that runs atop this tier - a non starter me any most other SaaS businesses. Heroku's cheapest "high availability option starts at $200/month, still with "Up to 15 minutes of downtime per month."... still, this is a concern for me...<p>Now, comparing to Amazon, their '1.7 GB memory Small DB, 1-year reserved, multi-region' is around $28/month (with storage & transfer for my app no more $35/ month). The equivalent Heroku plan, Tengu (1.7 GB mem) STARTS at $350/month!!! Wow, not I'm really rethinking my hosting platform.... Amazon looks more attractive, even if I have to do a bit of sys admin for my web server/cloud server.
this is awesome!
still, i miss one essential feature - compared to mysql on aws and heroku/postgres: there is no replication for read replicas. yes, you can deploy a "hot standby" replica in another availability zone for failover, but you cant read from it.
Useful tool to migrate from MySQL to PostgreSQL : <a href="https://github.com/lanyrd/mysql-postgresql-converter" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/lanyrd/mysql-postgresql-converter</a>
Somehow it seems pretty costly...Wouldn't it be cheaper for me to just run it on my virtual instance that's hosting the app and probably just back it up with S3.
I'm curious what the performance characteristics of this would be like.<p>A lot of people talk about how poor the storage performance on AWS is - but this seems to offer provisioned IOPS up to 30,000 IOPS.<p>I'm curious what sort of hardware/setup that translates to in the real world? Do you find your own dedicated setups have more throughput?<p>And there doesn't seem to be much info on the network bandwidth between RDS and EC2 either.
I've only ever used S3, but some of these AWS offerings do look interesting for my little projects. My question is, how do hours get calculated for billing? If I had my super low traffic blog using RDS, would I incur a few microseconds of time per DB hit, or is it rounded up to an hour, or is it the total time the DB is available period?
Oh sweet, now I can actually put this up for less than $ArmAndALeg <a href="https://github.com/benmathes/earthquakes" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/benmathes/earthquakes</a>
Note that AWS' PostgreSQL offering is more expensive than its MySQL counterpart.<p><a href="http://aws.amazon.com/rds/pricing/" rel="nofollow">http://aws.amazon.com/rds/pricing/</a>
Will anyone please explain the tactical reasons why PostgreSQL won? It's pretty obvious it has. I've basically ignored the database wars for a few years, so it's kind of interesting to see that everyone's using PostgreSQL now.
I hate PostgreSQL. Yes, I am a dummy application developer who doesn't understand database software.<p>Every time I try to install PostgreSQL it fails. Every time I install MySQL it installs successfully with no problems. Actually, that's the extent of my experience with it, and I guess I'm fine dealing with a database that doesn't validate date formats strictly if I can <i>use the damn database without hassle</i>. I am totally fine using Postgres at a company or with another DB developer who knows how to set up databases properly, but if I am starting a new project, I am going to use MySQL, period.