The selling point of Redis for me has been its simplicity. It has a fairly small set of features in comparison to other databases, yet extremely powerful.

[0] - http://oldblog.antirez.com/post/redis-persistence-demystifie...

(Disclaimer: Postgres guy, so I'm likely not impartial)

For read performance if your dataset fits in memory PG is just as fast as Redis.

The main attraction of Redis is in-memory writes with async persistence. Trading durability and availability for the increased performance. If you give up this then there is precisely 0 reasons to choose Redis over PostgreSQL.

FWIW, you can have that in postgres as well, cf. synchronous_commit = off

> Trading durability and availability for the increased performance. If you give up this then there is precisely 0 reasons to choose Redis over PostgreSQL.

As a PostgreSQL developer, I'd say that performance / latency / jitter can still be reasons to choose redis over postgres. The per-read overhead in redis is often a good bit lower than in postgres, and there's less variability in response times.

https://muut.com/blog/technology/redis-as-primary-datastore-...

Counter point of a real world implementation where they tried to make it the primary data store.

They resorted to weird hack-y shit for something I use MySQL or Postgres for on a regular basis. So have most people who built stuff on Redis like this:

> I use Redis as the primary and only database. > Additionally, it has data persistence reliability on par with Postgres and other battle-tested databases[0], so couldn't be happier about that.

Thanks

That being said, unless you're getting a massive number of requests, using a specialized HTTP library seems like overkill.