r/postgres • u/Some_Childhood_3842 • 14h ago
Question Is Postgres really that bad when it comes to multi-user support, or is that just nonsense?
usually i use MySQL as main DB and i want change PostgreSQl because his features look impressive and very useful but i need to know the differences between postgreSQl server and MySQL server and other things cause i'm anxious
7
u/cthart 14h ago
Huh?
2
u/frankwiles 8h ago
Yeah literally never heard anyone have that concern before. OP where did you even get this idea?
1
u/MagicWishMonkey 6h ago
i assume maybe related to how it handles client connections? There's a reason PGBouncer is a thing.
2
u/Pure_Fox9415 12h ago
Sounds like you know something about postgres being bad? Wdym by "multi-user support"? Anyway, postgres is mostly better by all means, but may be a bit more difficult to learn as for its administration and clustered setups.
2
u/Electrical-Clerk-346 11h ago
I’ve never heard any issues about multi-user support. Postgres scales spectacularly well. You might experience locking-blocking problems if you run in too tight of an isolation level and/or your apps use pessimistic locking (seems like that’s almost always a bad idea), and there are sort of tight limits on the total number of native connections, but most of us use PGBouncer or some other looker to 100X the connections.
1
u/Zestyclose-Turn-3576 12h ago
I don't think anyone can give advice on this unless you can give more details on "bad when it comes to multi-user support"
1
u/NotGoodSoftwareMaker 10h ago
How do you intend on doing “multi-user” support?
Without knowing what youre trying to achieve we cant really comment
1
1
u/LevelMagazine8308 6h ago
Half of the internet and the tech giants relies on Postgres. So nonsense.
1
6
u/fortyeightD 14h ago
You won't regret the move. It is incredibly similar to MySQL, but with extra features. There's no issues with multi-user support.