Postgres itself is a database “server.” There are several ways to connect to Postgres via “clients,” including GUIs, CLIs, and programming languages often via ORMs

Scaling PostgresML to 1 Million Requests per Second

Supabase is an open source Firebase alternative. Start your project with a Postgres database, Authentication, instant APIs, Edge Functions, Realtime subscriptions, and Storage.

check_postgres

Improving PostgreSQL performance beyond parameter tuning

PostgreSQL “Point-in-time Recovery” (PITR)

pgBackRest

Highly Available Postgres Clusters

Barman (Backup and Recovery Manager) is an open-source administration tool for disaster recovery of PostgreSQL servers

pg_stat_statements - finding ugly queries

One of those awesome features, is pg_stat_statements

It is important to understand the interaction between aggregates and SQL's WHERE and HAVING clauses. The fundamental difference between WHERE and HAVING is this: WHERE selects input rows before groups and aggregates are computed (thus, it controls which rows go into the aggregate computation), whereas HAVING selects group rows after groups and aggregates are computed. Thus, the WHERE clause must not contain aggregate functions; it makes no sense to try to use an aggregate to determine which rows will be inputs to the aggregates. On the other hand, the HAVING clause always contains aggregate functions. (Strictly speaking, you are allowed to write a HAVING clause that doesn't use aggregates, but it's seldom useful. The same condition could be used more efficiently at the WHERE stage.)

MySQL’s replication architecture means that if bugs do cause table corruption, the problem is unlikely to cause a catastrophic failure.

if the table they would write to is not a temporary table

so the maximum number of clients suggests the maximum possible memory use

Also, on Windows, large values for shared_buffers aren't as effective

search_path

The real benefit of JSONB: IndexesWe want our application to be fast. Without indexes, the database is forced to go from record to record (a table scan), checking to see if a condition is true. It’s no different with JSON data. In fact, it’s most likely worse since Postgres has to step in to each JSON document as well.

When you’re picking a data store, the most important thing to understand is where in your data — and where in its connections — the business value lies. If you don’t know yet, which is perfectly reasonable, then choose something that won’t paint you into a corner. Pushing arbitrary JSON into your database sounds flexible, but true flexibility is easily adding the features your business needs.

The BSON format used by MongoDB is limited to a maximum of 64 bits for representing an integer or floating point number, whereas the JSONB format used by Postgres does not have this limit. Postgres provides data constraint and validation functions to help ensure that JSON documents are more meaningful: for example, preventing attempts to store alphabetical characters where numerical values are expected. MongoDB offers automatic database sharding for easy horizontal scaling of JSON data storage. Scaling of Postgres installations has often been vertical. Horizontal scaling of Postgres is also possible, but tends to be more involved or use an additional third party solution. MongoDB also offers the possibility of increasing write throughput by deferring writing to disk. The tradeoff is potential loss of data, but this may suit users who have less need to persist their data.

The DROP COLUMN form does not physically remove the column, but simply makes it invisible to SQL operations. Subsequent insert and update operations in the table will store a null value for the column. Thus, dropping a column is quick but it will not immediately reduce the on-disk size of your table, as the space occupied by the dropped column is not reclaimed. The space will be reclaimed over time as existing rows are updated. (These statements do not apply when dropping the system oid column; that is done with an immediate rewrite.)