Two years ago I moved to a new company using Postgres as THE relational db, coming from years of Sql Server I found poor query plan issues troubleshooting tools.
Anyway, I don't know if it's the same in Postgres, but in Sql Server an OR condition like that could kill your performance quite easily in a relatively complex query, often I had to refactor my query to a UNION (usually with ALL to avoid a distinct step, but it depends on the specific case).
SQL Server is one of the descendants of Ingres, and PostgreSQL is, as the name might suggest, the successor project for database research after Ingres. They're both great databases really, it's a fun connection in their mutual history.
bob epstein was vp at brittion-lee when he left to form sybase.
BLI built a relational database machine (IDM), which was influenced by ingres but not much was inherited, code wise. sybase used a VM/pcode architecture, very much not like ingres.
I second that. I found it by far the most pleasant database to work with, including its tooling. Postgres is probably second. Too bad SQL Server is so expensive.
Maybe they'll change it at some point. I believe if SQL Server was free, it would dominate the business. I last used it 7+ years ago and back then it was (from my subjective experience) better than Postgres is now. And I love Postgres. But SQL Server was a dream to work with. Feature rich with amazing tooling. You can get most features in Postgres with plugins and manual work, but SQL Server does it all for you.
Anyway, I don't know if it's the same in Postgres, but in Sql Server an OR condition like that could kill your performance quite easily in a relatively complex query, often I had to refactor my query to a UNION (usually with ALL to avoid a distinct step, but it depends on the specific case).