Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Databases Software

What Is New In PostgreSQL 9.0 213

Jamie noted a blog that says "PostgreSQL 9.0 beta 2 just got released this week. We may see another beta before 9.0 is finally released, but it looks like PostgreSQL 9.0 will be here probably sometime this month. Robert Treat has a great slide presentation showcasing all the new features."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

What Is New In PostgreSQL 9.0

Comments Filter:
  • by interval1066 ( 668936 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @01:38PM (#32513272) Homepage Journal

    "Go Postgres!"

    Indeed, PostgreSQL is such a great system, in a lot of ways its better than mySQL; I'm constantly amazed by the number of orgs that have never heard of it.

  • by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @01:38PM (#32513284)

    What I would love to see is some standardization for SQL languages. It would be nice to take an App say say in PostgreSQL then use it in Oracle if you find that you need to go to a bigger infrastructure... As well move down, as a lot of apps are running on DB servers that are too big for their use. While the language has some nice features it would be much better to have an updated set of common function and calls so you can make your SQL more cross platform. A lot of the real work behind SQL isn't much in the Language but in what is happening underneath.


  • by atomic777 ( 860023 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @02:24PM (#32513984)

    I see the replication feature as being more about perception than anything else.

    Postgresql has long had a variety of replication options [] outside of the core that serve various needs, but it seems that the perception out in the community remained that postgresql was a stable, stand-alone database, and getting replication to work on top involved "hacks", while mysql, despite its faults, had "solid" replication that lent itself better to large installations.

    Of course this perception is far from reality, but it has been deemed a serious enough problem for the postgres team to finally include replication in the core.

  • by GooberToo ( 74388 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @05:48PM (#32516704)

    Well, both the real and "trollish" answer is, MySQL has been trying to catch up for almost five years now - and doesn't look like their even close.

    PostgreSQL has been a better database for a long time now. The pull of MySQL isn't its technical prowess but its "dumbness." Simply put, MySQL provides a lot in exchange for very little. Its the go to database for people who have little DBA experience, don't know what makes for a good RDBMS, or is simply needing a database where ACID doesn't matter.

    Basically MySQL is popular because its the low hanging fruit. Its generally everywhere and most people who need a database don't know any better. So they've heard something about MySQL and its available with their hosting company. That's generally all they needed to know. Of course that completely ignores the fact that for most every project, PostgreSQL provides a vastly superior solution. The down side is, to use PostgreSQL vs MySQL in these cases, you'd have to read all of a dozen pages or so (actually far less, but lets play devil's advocate). And for most, that's simply far too much to ask.

    Its basically the lazy or ignorant DBA's database. Or a database where reliability doesn't matter. Or integrity isn't an issue. There certainly are places for those kinds of databases - its just that most who pick MySQL don't realize they've made those trade offs.

  • by atomic777 ( 860023 ) on Wednesday June 09, 2010 @05:52PM (#32516746)

    You've touched on the fact that data replication is a hard problem and all user scenarios can't be (sensibly) solved with a single solution. MySQL replication works well enough for the web crowd that has no idea what ACID stands for and its adoption has spread as a result. There being only one choice of replication solution also makes that an easy choice to make.

    Even being able to choose which replication solution to use with postgresql requires a substantial level of expertise. What postgresql has lacked, until now, is an "out of the box" solution that will be used by default, by the uninitiated, to get postgresql in the door. Then if they ever learn what ACID stands for, if they understand what asynchronous or synchronous replication is, they will be happy as hell that they didn't choose mysql way back when their whole site/business ran on only 2 servers.

10.0 times 0.1 is hardly ever 1.0.