On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 12:47 PM, Thomas Løcke <thomas.granvej6@gmail.com> wrote:
> Anybody know of any recent comparisons made between the two?
>
> I'm in the process of buying a new telephony related software suite,
> and I'm getting mixed advice. Some say that MSSQL is _much_
> better/faster than PostgreSQL, and others say the opposite.
>
> The vendor is more or less indifferent, with a small plus to the
> Microsoft solution because, well, they are a Microsoft shop. The
> sales-people all bang on about MSSQL being the superior choice, and
> PostgreSQL being a "toy compared to the Microsoft RDBMS". The tech
> people though are divided into three groups: One group says the two
> systems are more or less equal, another group who says the Microsoft
> database is superior and finally a group who speaks highly of
> PostgreSQL.
>
> I've not been able to convince them to send me some actual benchmark
> numbers, which actually should turn on quite a few alarms, come to
> think about it. :o)
>
> Maybe you guys are aware of some recent generic tests/comparisons
> between the two systems?
It's probably much more important what you're running each on than the
db itself for most of these situations.
Anyone who thinks pgsql is a toy is an idiot. or a sales person.
Wait, that might be redundant here.
Anyone who judges one poorly while using only the other is a
cheerleader. I like cheerleaders, when they're in a uniform dancing
around on the gym floor. I don't tend to look to them for advice on
which dbms to use.
I've only used MSSQL enough to know I don't really care for it that
much, and I've converted a dozen or so MSSQL users to PostgreSQL just
by letting them connect to my db instead of theirs (think corporate
intranet). But that could have just been because my server was better
run and configured than theirs.
Anyway, both are reasonably good servers. Don't listen to a sales
person for goodness sake, they're in it to sell you stuff, and a
bigger price tag is better for them. Test it for yourself.