Databases (PostgreSQL wire)

Where this market publishes its structure

• Providers' own PostgreSQL compatibility pages and feature lists (fetched, saved under evidence/compatibility/) machine-readable
• Providers' own contracts naming the PostgreSQL wire protocol (info/tags/path descriptions) machine-readable
• AWS, Azure and Google Cloud marketplace listings (distribution, reported beside) machine-readable
• JS-rendered pages (SingleStore, Upstash, VAST, Materialize docs home) not machine-readable: client-rendered; no text without a browser
• Conformance test running the PostgreSQL regression suite / libpq clients against each endpoint not machine-readable: no register exists; not built

Own = declares at least one integration itself; covered = visible only because an aggregator, standards body, regulator or partner contract names it; distribution-only = listed only on cloud marketplaces it sells through, a channel reported beside, never counted as its own declared integrations; undeclared = nothing we can read, so no number; declares_compatibility = providers with a `compatible` shape vote, report only (kin, 2026-10-13): never counted as own, never in depth or position.

Taxonomy how this market maps onto apis.io

Derived 2026-10-23 from the 29 providers in this market we could resolve in the catalog. The percentage is the share of those providers carrying each one; it describes the market, not the tag or industry. Tag groups have no page of their own yet, so they are listed unlinked.

share of resolved cohort carrying it; tags >=0.20 & >=3 members (max 12, junk dropped), tag_groups >=0.20 (cooccurrence, non-cross-cutting; max 8), industries >=0.20 (max 6), areas >=0.10 (max 6; areas are keyword-matched and sparse), capabilities L1 >=0.20 (max 8); derive-market-taxonomy.py

Leaders by position (provisional)

Provisional: grouped by position, depth compared within a position only. Distribution (cloud marketplaces) and iPaaS bridges are counted beside position, never inside it. Unknown-builder listings are left out of position shares and counted here.

builds-on 12 · publishes apps on other platforms' stores

covered 2 · reached mainly through aggregators

standard 6 · listed by a voluntary standard's own directory

mixed 3 · no single mode dominates

distribution 1 · only sells through cloud marketplaces

undeclared 5 · declares nothing we can read: no number

Shape adoption report only — not weighted

Pattern: imitation. Shape gravity (counted by company, one edge per provider, the best evidence kept): 20. Convergence in the cohort: 19 of 24 (79.2%) — cohort members (minus the anchor's family, mediators and rival shapes) with at least one compatible edge to the shape, read from evidence.

postgres-wire anchor PostgreSQL · 20 adopters, 22 declared by the provider

By degree: full 7, declared-subset 8, declared-unqualified 7. By evidence: own-docs 20, own-contract 2.

• Rival shapes (own contracts, not re-served): PingCAP, SingleStore, Vitess, MySQL
• In the cohort, declaring nothing we can read: Render, Google Cloud SQL, Xata, Aiven, Heroku
• Evidence ladder: conformance-register > own-docs > own-contract > own-blog > ae-structural. Degrees: full | declared-subset | declared-unqualified | interoperable-subset | same-vocabulary-own-path.

Snapshot timeline 2 weekly snapshot(s); nothing is weighted until it holds across four