>Free comes with a lot of caveats (like no critical support unless you pay for it and hope you get good support), and lack of quality documentation. My client that used MySQL finally gave up and moved to SQL server because it actually costs less due to ease of use, features, speed, and reliability. They have had absolutely no regrets about switching.

>My company and our clients use SQL Server (one uses Oracle too). If/when something really bad happens (which is very rare or never generally) it is nice to be able to pick up the phone and get first rate vendor support.


I see Postgres as a free Oracle. And today IBM and SUN back Postgres with their money. Of course now that SUN has purchased MySQL and the support for Postgres may change. But IBM just put millions into EB enterprise (yes you have to pay for it). They are the commerical support and extend Postgres. Look's like they are going to be around for a long time.

As far as doc's. I'd put up postgres doc's against anybody's in the industry. The problem I find with the Postgres doc's (and the postgres list) is they provide to much infomation. Providing 9 ways to do something and only later find out that the recommend way is the 8th way is just silly.

Performance is about the same for Postgres vs MsSQL2005 vs Oracle. Some things are faster and some things are slower. For example "count(*)" performance is terrible compared to Oracle and MsSQL. But Postgres uses a cache system for writes (standard setup) and has little to no locking issues. Yes Oracle can to do the same but not MsSQL. On the other hand Oracle has so many features I've never used that I'm not the best person to judge on Postgres vs Oracle. So I call it a draw.