If you need something stable and reliable, then MySQL might be a better choice.
In my experience, this is unfounded. The Postgresql project is far more careful about data corruption and correctness. A few examples:
Mysql used to truncate records silently (I think this was fixed a while back with strict mode)
Mysql used to let you insert nonsense like 'notadate' into dates (now fixed I think with strict mode, is it in default?)
Data corruption - I've seen data corruption in Mysql when a server was rebooted which led to the server being unable to read the database data, and required a repair before it would restart. I've never seen something similar with Postgresql.
Postgresql have added features at a steady rate, they've been quite measured in their approach to new features, particularly in point releases. 'Break-neck' is not a good characterisation of that process.
For stable and reliable I'd recommend Postgresql over Mysql without hesitation.
In my experience, this is unfounded. The Postgresql project is far more careful about data corruption and correctness. A few examples:
Postgresql have added features at a steady rate, they've been quite measured in their approach to new features, particularly in point releases. 'Break-neck' is not a good characterisation of that process.For stable and reliable I'd recommend Postgresql over Mysql without hesitation.