SQL Server 2017, really? Interesting choice. Open source but we have to pay licenses for the database if we want to self host. I wonder what was wrong with PostgreSQL or MySQL even if they're using .NET Core as a language.
Edit: there is an issue for that https://github.com/bitwarden/core/issues/10
As Bitwarden states in the core readme (https://github.com/bitwarden/core#requirements) "These dependencies are free to use." And if you lookup the licensing on MSFTs website (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/sql-server/sql-server-2017-p...) you can see that the SQL Server Express version is free.
Note: No, I'm not an MSFT employee and not related in any way to the mentioned company. I'm just a (not so regular) human being who first looks up information before posting statements.
The README requires SQL Server so I might be excused thinking that it would work only with that software. Nice to know that it does work on the free version too. I googled and looked on MS site and didn't find out if SQL Server Express exists for Linux too, but I'm on my phone right now. I only managed to involuntarily download a .exe :-)
There you go: https://hub.docker.com/r/microsoft/mssql-server-linux/
:)
Basically, my flow chart for DB selection:
Do you have an enterprise worth of money to burn on the deployment and maintenance? Oracle.
Are you deploying to Windows? MSSQL.
Else: Postgres.
Even then I'd actively try to avoid it.
Source: three years installing, configuring and supporting it.
†: Now that I've used it twice, I move that we make an "enterprise worth" a unit of measurement of money, like a "Library of Congress" is a unit of measurement of storage.
It all sounded really good until this point. I was even going to say you could add support for postgres, but I don't know a lot of open source devs who are using. NET.