Sure, a few organizations may actually need some obscure feature that Oracle provides, but again, it's niche. For most companies, Postgres provides way more features than they will ever use.
And for the other 1%, it sometimes happens that their need for a specific feature in Oracle DB turns out to be entirely unnecessary.
Not to mention that the vast majority of products turn out to be fancy CRUD apps. Doesn't matter though, Oracle will convince you that you NEED their DB regardless.
I’d argue that, the real value of Postgres isn’t that it has capabilities on par with Oracle, but rather that, it has a thriving plugin ecosystem. If someone needs that obscure Oracle feature, they may have the option of writing it. If there’s something a lot of people are interested in (such as vector features), someone will implement it.
There’s one thing Postgres doesn’t provide. It doesn’t provide a supplier who a company can put their liability on. A supplier who can fix the problem in Postgres code and maintain it with authority.
But don’t get me wrong. Postgres is an awesome database system.
Because I suspect it does not mean what I think you think it means.
(Typically the EULA of all those non-Postgres systems are 'this is sold as is, no warranty as to suitability to your purpose, yada yada'
Often times people believe that if they're paying many monies for a support contract, that means they can relocate their liability to that company. Almost every time, that company has better lawyers / contract writers.
And for the other 1%, it sometimes happens that their need for a specific feature in Oracle DB turns out to be entirely unnecessary.
Not to mention that the vast majority of products turn out to be fancy CRUD apps. Doesn't matter though, Oracle will convince you that you NEED their DB regardless.