Support for Postgresql as DB backend

It would be great if SuiteCRM supported using Postgres as a database backend.

I’ve started working on this at using the pg patches from and applying them to SuiteCRM 7.0. seems to work fine. I didn’t do much testing, but I did a fresh install with no errors.

Since then, I merged the 7.0.1 changes and that seems to have broken stuff. Maybe some modules now loading (7.0 from git didn’t load AOS quotes and other modules) aren’t compatible with the pg changes, but I haven’t looked beyond seeing that fresh install didn’t work.

If anyone wants to help with testing, etc, that would be great. If SuiteCRM is interested in getting these patches into the main release (once they are ready and tested, etc) that would even better.

Hi bugreporter,

Thanks for this suggestion. We believe there are a few forks but this would be a good contribution when fully working and tested rigorously.



The project was not updated for 5 years. Is the patch relevant for the current version of the SuiteCRM (7.8.x, 7.9.x)?

Is it support for latest version? Can you please suggest me

Has anyone got any further with this via another fork?

The most advanced efforts are here:

This lost momentum when people started talking about Doctrine support in SuiteCRM 8, which would bring PostgreSQL support with it. But it’s not promised for 8.0, just for 8.someday_maybe.

But I really believe we should continue to pursue the above PR, since I expect a lot of problems, difficulties and delays introducing Doctrine support. There is so much direct SQL scattered all over the code…

And it would be great to have PostgreSQL support for 7.x, it’s not going away completely anytime soon.


I’m new to the forum here but did PostgresSQL ever get fully integrated into SuiteCRM as a DB backend?



  1. The efforts to integrate with the legacy 7.x versions are stalled.

  2. The new SuiteCRM uses Doctrine so the way is prepared for that possibility; but since much of Suite 8 is still the legacy code, you can make the switch yet (and I don’t see a chance of this being finalized soon without getting back to approach no. 1)