Overview
Both are excellent and either will serve most apps for years. Postgres has the richer feature set — advanced types (JSONB, arrays, geospatial), powerful indexing, strict SQL correctness, and strong concurrency via MVCC. MySQL is famously easy to run, has a huge ecosystem, and (with InnoDB) is a fast, reliable workhorse for read-heavy sites; it shards at extreme scale via Vitess.
PostgreSQL vs MySQL: key differences
| PostgreSQL | MySQL | |
|---|---|---|
| Feature depth | Rich (JSONB, GIS, CTEs, extensions) | Leaner, simpler |
| SQL correctness | Very strict/standards-first | More lenient historically |
| Concurrency | MVCC, strong write concurrency | Good with InnoDB |
| Replication | Logical + streaming | Mature, simple to set up |
| Scale-out | Citus and friends | Vitess (used at YouTube scale) |
When to use PostgreSQL
Complex queries, JSON + relational mix, geospatial, data integrity and advanced features, or when you want the most capable default.
When to use MySQL
Read-heavy web apps, teams already invested in the MySQL ecosystem, or planning Vitess-style horizontal sharding.
Verdict
For a green-field project, Postgres is the modern default thanks to its feature set and correctness. MySQL remains a great, battle-tested choice — pick it for ecosystem fit or a known Vitess scaling path.
Common questions
Is Postgres faster than MySQL?
It depends on the workload. MySQL/InnoDB can edge ahead on simple read-heavy queries; Postgres often wins on complex queries, writes under concurrency, and analytical work.
Should I switch from MySQL to Postgres?
Only for a concrete reason (a feature you need, like JSONB or GIS). A working MySQL deployment is rarely worth migrating just for preference.