Forum OpenACS Q&A: Response to If money grew on trees, which would you choose Oracle or PG?

a) if money and hardware were truly no object, I would prefer Postgres. With large amounts of 'no-object-money' I could hire enough talented people to add whatever I wanted to Postgres. This would be *far* cheaper than a mirrored action on Oracle.

b) In Oracle: partitions, tablespaces, CONNECT BY, more visible tuning parameters.
In PG: rules, backups/exports have less options than Oracle but are less likely to fuck me over from small version differences. So I'd say PG is ahead in backups.

c) Oracle: administration, stupid tuning defaults, partition stupidity.
PG: no partitions or tablespaces. CONNECT BY would be nice, or MERGE (iirc) -- the new keyword IBM will be bringing to the table to combine the 'update or insert' two-statement approach we're all familiar with into one DML.

d) dance, admins, dance!!

e) As soon as I destroy the unbelievers in comp.databases.theory I'll pick through the remainder and see what's left.

All I really want right now in Postgres is partitions.