We use mysql in prod at work and frankly the reason I didn't bother bringing up the mysql vs postgresql debate is simply high availability.
We have a multi-master mysql database based on percona's pxc.
And it works beautifully... sometimes a node crashes and it's no big deal.
Meanwhile in pgland it's quite a landmine of solutions, each of which seems to be studied accurately. And there is a constellation of other solutions (extensions or posygresql distributions) that maybe fit your use case, maube don't.
So many licenses, including the Business Source License which is non-free license.
Also there's this CockroachDB Community License (CCL), which I guess is a made-up license that's going to include some whatever terms.
I might still accept this mix of licenses however I can't find the definition of "foundational features" -- what do I "lose" by using the OSS version instead of one of their managed offerings?
From a quick overview, it's soft-no from me (in the sense that it probably wouldn't be my first choice).
We have a multi-master mysql database based on percona's pxc.
And it works beautifully... sometimes a node crashes and it's no big deal.
Meanwhile in pgland it's quite a landmine of solutions, each of which seems to be studied accurately. And there is a constellation of other solutions (extensions or posygresql distributions) that maybe fit your use case, maube don't.