Re: Compared MS SQL 2000 to Postgresql 9.0 on Windows

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Tom Polak
<tom(at)rockfordarearealtors(dot)org> wrote:
> That is what I am really after.  I know that it will be a lot of work, but
> at $15,000 for MSSQL server that is a lot of man hours.  Before I invest a
> lot of time to do some real benchmarking I need to make sure it would be
> worth my time.  I realize going into this that we will need to change
> almost everything expect maybe the simplest Select statements.

I doubt it will be as bad as all that. I think you'll need to spend
some time getting the database configured properly (you can ask for
help here, or buy support) and then I'd guess that much of it will
just work. 60%? 80%? 95%? And then there will be some number of
problem cases that you'll need to spend time beating into submission.
I've had really good luck with PG over the years, and in fact switched
to it originally because I was having problems with another database
and when I switched to PG they just... went away. Now your data set
is bigger than the ones I've worked with, so that tends to make things
a bit more complicated, but the important thing is to have some
patience and don't assume that any problems you run into are
insoluble. They probably aren't. Run EXPLAIN ANALYZE a lot, read the
documentation, ask questions, and if all else fails pay somebody a few
bucks to help you get through it.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company