Oracle / Database
Oracle and PostgreSQL. The real cost comparison.
PostgreSQL carries no license fee. Oracle charges per processor plus options plus support. The decision turns on total cost of ownership, not the sticker.
PostgreSQL carries no license fee. Oracle charges per processor plus options plus support. The decision turns on total cost of ownership, not the sticker.
PostgreSQL carries no license fee, while Oracle Database charges per processor or per Named User Plus plus options and support, so the true comparison is total cost of ownership, not a license line.
PostgreSQL is a mature open source relational database released under a permissive license described on the PostgreSQL licence page. Oracle Database is commercial software priced in the Oracle Technology Price List.
The headline is that PostgreSQL has no license fee. The real question is total cost of ownership across the workload over several years.
Oracle Database charges a license fee per processor or per Named User Plus, plus annual support, plus separately licensed options. PostgreSQL charges nothing for the software itself under its open source license.
Oracle Database Enterprise Edition licenses per processor using the core factor table, then adds options such as Partitioning, Diagnostics, and Tuning. Annual support runs at roughly 22 percent of the license fee.
PostgreSQL is free to use, modify, and deploy under its permissive license. Costs are optional commercial support, hosting, and the engineering to run it. The PostgreSQL project provides the core software.
On a three to five year view, PostgreSQL removes the license and support lines but adds migration and engineering effort. Oracle front loads license cost and locks in recurring support. The net depends on workload and existing skills.
Oracle Database versus PostgreSQL cost lines
| Cost line | Oracle Database | PostgreSQL |
|---|---|---|
| License fee | Per processor or NUP | None |
| Database options | Separately licensed | Built in or extensions |
| Annual support | About 22 percent of license | Optional commercial |
| Migration | None if staying | Real one time cost |
| Engineering | Lower for tuned estates | Higher ownership |
Buyers compare base database prices and forget the options. Partitioning, Advanced Compression, and the Diagnostics and Tuning packs are common additions that materially raise the Oracle side of the comparison.
PostgreSQL wins clearly on new applications, non critical workloads, and estates with engineering capacity. Oracle tends to stay where deep feature dependencies, extreme scale, or risk tolerance make migration uneconomic.
Greenfield applications and standard transactional workloads run well on PostgreSQL with no migration tax. These are the cases where the license saving is close to pure.
White Paper ยท Oracle
The Oracle Buyer Side Framework
The moves we use across Oracle Database, Java and ULA estates. Read it free.
The common pitch, often from the Oracle account team, is that PostgreSQL looks cheaper on license but costs more once you add support, risk, and engineering, so the move rarely pays off. We disagree with the blanket version of that claim. In the comparisons Fredrik Filipsson modeled, PostgreSQL won decisively for new and non critical workloads where there was no migration to fund, and the Oracle support stream alone often exceeded the entire PostgreSQL run cost. The buyer side move is to segment the estate, move the workloads that carry no migration tax first, and keep Oracle only where a specific feature or scale dependency truly justifies it. Treating it as all or nothing favors the incumbent.
Source: Redress Compliance advisory engagement file, 2024 to 2025.
PostgreSQL has no license fee. That is not the same as free. Compare total cost of ownership across the workload, not the sticker.
Migration difficulty scales with the use of Oracle specific features. Plain SQL and standard schemas move readily. PL/SQL packages, proprietary features, and tight application coupling raise the effort and the cost.
Stored procedure conversion, data type mapping, and application query changes are the main work items. Tooling helps with the mechanical parts but the validation and testing carry the real time.
PostgreSQL has no license fee and is free to use and modify under its permissive open source license. It is not free to operate, since hosting, engineering, and optional commercial support still cost money.
Oracle Database licenses per processor or per Named User Plus, plus separately licensed options such as Partitioning and Diagnostics, plus annual support at roughly 22 percent of the license fee.
For most standard transactional workloads, yes. Oracle retains advantages in some advanced features and extreme scale scenarios, which is where a specific dependency can justify staying on Oracle.
Migration and engineering ownership. The license saving is large, but moving Oracle specific code and validating it is the real cost, which is why new workloads carry the cleanest saving.
When deep proprietary feature dependencies, extreme scale, or low risk tolerance make migration uneconomic. In those cases the migration cost outweighs the license saving over the planning horizon.
It depends on feature use. Standard SQL and simple schemas move quickly, while heavy PL/SQL and proprietary feature dependence can extend the project across many months of conversion and testing.
Yes, and it is often the most economic path. Segment the estate, move the workloads with no migration tax to PostgreSQL, and keep Oracle only where a real dependency exists.
No. Redress Compliance is 100 percent buyer side. We do not resell or implement software. We model the total cost of ownership comparison for the customer.
Oracle ULA exit moves, Java audit defense posture, certification framework, and the buyer side moves across the Oracle Database, Java, and EBS estate.
Used across more than five hundred enterprise engagements. Independent. Buyer side. Built for procurement leaders running the next renewal cycle.
