[gaius]

Because SQL Server is actually an excellent database, fast, reliable and full-featured. Consider that Postgres only got parallel queries a few months ago that SQL Server has had for 15 years! And in terms of replication, clustering etc SQL Server is still well ahead of PG. Now don't get me wrong I am a huge PG fan, but burying your head in the sand "because it's Microsoft" is unprofessional.

[Beltiras]

MSSQL still doesn't have replication on Linux. Here's one data scientists hillarious take on the difference between MSSQL and Postgres: https://www.pg-versus-ms.com/

[dhd415]

I'm a big fan of PG and PG is good enough that it can compare favorably to MSSQL on its own merits, but that article reads more as a screed against commercial software than an objective assessment of PG's strengths relative to MSSQL. As an example, a big advantage of MSSQL for data analysis applications is its column store indexes which the author dismisses as something he doesn't use.

[ljoshua]

MSSQL is in the very new process of actually becoming available on Linux. Give'em a bit of time at least.

[Beltiras]

I'm rather biased, I'll freely admit that. Having deployed some number of Django on PG solutions (some of which deliver moderate req/s) I will gravitate there just on experience alone.

[rcarmo]

That's actually about MSSQL 2014. 2016 is a substantially different beast.