It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
61–70 of 349 posts
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#62Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#63I'll take it one step further and say you should always ask yourself if the application or project even needs a beefy database like Postgres or if you can get by with using SQLite. For example, I've found a few self-hosted services that just overcomplicated their setup and deployment because they picked Postgres or MariaDB over SQLite, despite it being a much better self-contained solution.
I really like having some JSON storage because I don't know my schema up front all the time, and just shoving every possible piece of potentially useful metadata in there has (generally) not bit me, but not having that critical piece of metadata has been annoying (that field that should be NOT NULL is NULL because I can't populated it after the fact).
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#64The point of Redis is data structures and algorithmic complexity of operations. If you use Redis well, you can't replace it with PostgreSQL. But I bet you can't replace memcached either for serious use cases.
What I like about the "just use PostgreSQL" idea is that, unfortunately, most people don't use Redis well. They are just using it as a cache, which IMHO, isn't even equivalent to scratching the surface of all the amazing things Redis can do.
As we all know, it's all about tradeoffs. If you are only using Redis as a cache, then does the performance improvement you get by using it out weight the complexity of another system dependency? Maybe? Depends...
Side note: If you are using Redis for caching and queue management, those are two separate considerations. Your cache and queues should never live on the same Redis instance because the should have different max-memory policies!
The newest versions of Rails have really got me thinking about the simplicity of a PostgreSQL only deployment, then migrating to other data stores as needed down the line. I'd put the need to migrate squarely into the "good problems" to have because it indicates that your service is growing and expanding past the first few stages of growth.
All that being said, man I think Redis is sooooo cool. It's the hammer I am always for a nail to use on.
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#65I've found that Postgres consumes (by default) more disk than, for example, MySQL. And the difference is quite significant. That means more money that I have to pay every month. But, sure Postgres seems like I system that integrates a lot of subsystems, that adds a lot of complexity too. I'm just marking the bad points because you mention the good points in the post. You're also trying to sell you service, which is g…
Some people do Postgres on compressed ZFS volumes to great success.
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#66Love the sentiment! And I'm a user - but what about aggregations? Elasticsearch offers a ton of aggregates out of the box for "free" completely configurable by query string. Tiger Data offers continuous aggs via hypertable but they need to be configured quite granularly and they're not super flexible. How are you all thinking about that when it comes to postgres and aggregations?
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#67I’m a huge Postgres fan. That said, I don’t agree with the blanket advice of “just use Postgres.” That stance often comes from folks who haven’t been exposed enough to (newer) purpose-built technologies and the tremendous value they can create The argument, as in this blog, is that a single Postgres stack is simpler and reduces complexity. What’s often overlooked is the CAPEX and OPEX required to make Postgres work w…
I took it to mean “make Postgres your default choice”, not “always use Postgres no matter what”
Re: It's 2026, Just Use Postgres
#68Blog posts, like academic papers, should have to divulge how AI has been used to write them.