Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Go ahead, self-host Postgres

pierce.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 407 posts

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#21

Post by notaseojh »

paulryanrogers wrote: post #18
heipei wrote: post #15

I still don't get how folks can hype Postgres with every second post on HN, yet there is no simple batteries-included way to run a HA Postgres cluster with automatic failover like you can do with MongoDB. I'm genuinely curious how people deal with this in production when they're self-hosting.

RDS provides some HA. HAProxy or PGBouncer can help when self hosting.

it's easy to through names out like this (pgbackrest is also useful...) but getting them setup properly in a production environment is not at all straightforward, which I think is the point.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#23

Post by mfalcao »

heipei wrote: post #15

I still don't get how folks can hype Postgres with every second post on HN, yet there is no simple batteries-included way to run a HA Postgres cluster with automatic failover like you can do with MongoDB. I'm genuinely curious how people deal with this in production when they're self-hosting.

The most common way to achieve HÁ is using Patroni. The easiest way to set it up is using Autobase (https://autobase.tech).

CloudNativePG (https://cloudnative-pg.io) is a great option if you’re using Kubernetes.

There’s also pg_auto_failover which is a Postgres extension and a bit less complex than the alternatives, but it has its drawbacks.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#24

Post by tresil »

heipei wrote: post #15

I still don't get how folks can hype Postgres with every second post on HN, yet there is no simple batteries-included way to run a HA Postgres cluster with automatic failover like you can do with MongoDB. I'm genuinely curious how people deal with this in production when they're self-hosting.

If you’re running Kubernetes, CloudNativePG seems to be the “batteries included” HA Postgres cluster that’s becoming the standard in this area.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#25

Post by ezekg »

odie5533 wrote: post #4

Recommends hosting postgres yourself. Doesn't recommend a distribution stack. If you try this at a startup to save $50 a month, you will never recoup the time you wasted setting it up. We pay dedicated managed services for these things so we can make products on top of them.

Maybe come back when your database spend is two or three orders of magnitude higher? It gets expensive pretty fast in my experience.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#26

Post by marcosdumay »

ZeroConcerns wrote: post #11

So, yeah, I guess there's much confusion about what a 'managed database' actually is ? Because for me, the table stakes are: -Backups: the provider will push a full generic disaster-recovery backup of my database to an off-provider location at least daily, without the need for a maintenance window -Optimization: index maintenance and storage optimization are performed automatically and transparently -Multi-datacenter…

IMO, the reason to self-host your database is latency.

Yes, I'd say backups and analysis are table stakes for hiring it, and multi-datacenter failover is a relevant nice to have. But the reason to do it yourself is because it's literally impossible to get anything as good as you can build in somebody's else computer.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#27

Post by notaseojh »

ijustlovemath wrote: post #8
odie5533 wrote: post #4

Recommends hosting postgres yourself. Doesn't recommend a distribution stack. If you try this at a startup to save $50 a month, you will never recoup the time you wasted setting it up. We pay dedicated managed services for these things so we can make products on top of them.

There's not much to recommend; just use the Postgres from your distribution's LTS repo. I like Debian for its rock solid stability.

"just use postgres from your distro" is *wildly* underselling the amount of work that it takes to go from apt install postgres to having a production ready setup (backups, replica, pooling, etc). Granted, if it's a tiny database just pg-dumping might be enough, but for many that isn't going to be enough.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#28

Post by donatj »

The author brings up the point, but I have always found surprising how much more expensive managed databases are than a comparable VPS.

I would expect a little bit more as a cost of the convenience, but in my experience it's generally multiple times the expense. It's wild.

This has kept me away from managed databases in all but my largest projects.

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#29

Post by dewey »

I recently was also doing some research into what projects exist that come close to a “managed Postgres on Digital Ocean” experience, sadly there’s some building blocks but nothing that really makes it a complete no-brainer.

https://blog.notmyhostna.me/posts/what-i-wish-existed-for-se...

Re: Go ahead, self-host Postgres

#30

Post by arcbyte »

thedougd wrote: post #16
ZeroConcerns wrote: post #11

So, yeah, I guess there's much confusion about what a 'managed database' actually is ? Because for me, the table stakes are: -Backups: the provider will push a full generic disaster-recovery backup of my database to an off-provider location at least daily, without the need for a maintenance window -Optimization: index maintenance and storage optimization are performed automatically and transparently -Multi-datacenter…

It's even worse when you start finding you're staffing specialized skills. You have the Postgres person, and they're not quite busy enough, but nobody else wants to do what they do. But then you have an issue while they're on vacation, and that's a problem. Now I have a critical service but with a bus factor problem. So now I staff two people who are now not very busy at all. One is a bit ambitious and is tired of be…

Slack is a necessary component in well functioning systems.
Post reply on HN