DEV Community

Cover image for PostgreSQL Didn’t Fail at Scale -My Architecture Assumptions Did
Gaurav Talesara
Gaurav Talesara

Posted on

PostgreSQL Didn’t Fail at Scale -My Architecture Assumptions Did

When I read “Scaling PostgreSQL to power 800 million ChatGPT users”, I didn’t read it as a Postgres success story.

I read it as a reality check.

Because like many developers building SaaS products, I’ve caught myself thinking:

“This will work for now… but later we’ll need something more scalable.”

Later usually means:

  • sharding
  • multiple databases
  • complex infra
  • future-me’s problem

Turns out, future-me might be overthinking it.


Building SaaS Makes You Fear Scale Too Early

While working on SaaS-style platforms (hiring tools, dashboards, internal systems), PostgreSQL is often the first thing people want to replace.

Not because it’s failing.
But because we assume it will fail.

The OpenAI post forced me to pause and ask:

If Postgres can survive ChatGPT traffic, what exactly am I afraid of?


The Database Wasn’t the Hero — Discipline Was

What impressed me wasn’t the scale.
It was the restraint.

  • One primary database
  • Reads pushed aggressively to replicas
  • Bad queries treated like production bugs
  • Write-heavy or non-core data moved out

Postgres wasn’t used as a junk drawer.
It was used as a core system with clear boundaries.

That’s something I don’t always do in my own projects.


Reads Are the Silent Cost Killers

Most SaaS apps are read-heavy:

  • dashboards
  • candidate profiles
  • activity timelines
  • analytics views

Yet we design everything as if writes are the main concern.

This story reminded me:

Scaling isn’t about handling more writes — it’s about protecting the primary from reads.

Once that clicks, architecture decisions become simpler.


Simplicity Is Not Laziness

I used to think:

“A simple architecture means it won’t scale.”

Now I’m starting to believe the opposite.

Simple systems:

  • are easier to debug
  • fail more gracefully
  • survive longer than clever ones

OpenAI didn’t avoid complexity forever.
They just earned the right to add it later.


What I’m Taking Back to My Own SaaS Work

After reading this, my mindset changed:

  • I trust PostgreSQL more
  • I fear premature sharding less
  • I care more about query quality than new tech
  • I think harder before adding “just in case” infrastructure

Not everything needs to be distributed.
Not everything needs to be clever.
Most things need to be boring and reliable.


Final Thought

PostgreSQL didn’t scale because it’s magical.

It scaled because engineers respected its limits
and designed around them instead of fighting them.

That’s probably the real lesson for anyone building SaaS today.

Top comments (0)