Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gSkjc-0008Kz-Gy for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:29:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gSkja-0005eK-U1 for pgsql-admin@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:29:38 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gSkja-0005eD-IS for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:29:38 +0000 Received: from tamriel.snowman.net ([2001:470:e38f::11]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1gSkjT-0003OI-Qx for pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 15:29:37 +0000 Received: by tamriel.snowman.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 70A3E5F7A7; Fri, 30 Nov 2018 10:29:31 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2018 10:29:31 -0500 From: Stephen Frost To: Achilleas Mantzios Cc: pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org Subject: Re: Backup solution over unreliable network Message-ID: <20181130152931.GY3415@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20181130120613.GW3415@tamriel.snowman.net> <6834c573-2a52-dd63-0264-5fc7258e7857@matrix.gatewaynet.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ID5h4+vKj8m6mVzk" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6834c573-2a52-dd63-0264-5fc7258e7857@matrix.gatewaynet.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk --ID5h4+vKj8m6mVzk Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Greetings, * Achilleas Mantzios (achill@matrix.gatewaynet.com) wrote: > On 30/11/18 2:06 =CE=BC.=CE=BC., Stephen Frost wrote: > >>- I have only read the best reviews about PgBackRest, can PgBackRest ad= dress those issues? > >Glad to hear you've read good reviews about pgbackrest. As for > >addressing these issues, pgbackrest has: > > > >- Backup resume > >- Max WAL lag (in other words, you can have it simply start throwing WAL > > away if it can't archive it, rather than allowing the primary to run > > out of disk space) >=20 > This is just superb! In our case we had the following architecture (now b= arman is defunct) : >=20 > Primary (consistent snapshots with pg_start/stop_backup)+ --> reliable ne= t (archive_command via rsync) --> WAL repository > =C2=A0=C2=A0 | (async streaming replication) > =C2=A0=C2=A0 | (reliable net) > =C2=A0=C2=A0 V > Standby --> unreliable net (barman via method rsync + barman streaming fr= om standby ***) --> remote cloud provider site(barman) >=20 > So Primary and Standby are in the same cloud provider over consistent > (mostly) network, whereas the barman (remote recovery) site communicates > over internet. We would like to keep the old functionality (or even add a > new PgBackRest node in the main cloud provider, so the question is : is > there a way for archive-push to two different stanzas? Or delegate the > archive-push to work from the Standby ? We've had a few folks using pgbackrest to push to two stanzas by way of basically doing 'pgbackrest --stanza=3Da archive-push && pgbackrest --stanza=3Db archive-push' and with that it does work, and you could combine that with the max WAL setting, potentially, but it's not a solution that I'm really a fan of. That's definitely a use-case we've been thinking about though and have plans to support in the future, but there are other things we're tackling now and so multi-repo hasn't been a priority. We've also considered supporting archive-mode=3Dalways and being able to have the standby also push WAL and while we may support that in the future, I'd say it's farther down on the list than multi-repo support. As I recall, David Steele also had some specific technical concerns around how to handle two systems pushing into the same WAL archive. Having archive-mode=3Dalways be allowed if it's going to an independent repo is an interesting thought though and might be simpler to do. Thanks! Stephen --ID5h4+vKj8m6mVzk Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJcAVdbAAoJEO1sijiDR2RVb9IP/im7maK/xxs9RCGFDYOkyt5B lk1OHq8OVPlqUNi8YjfCoyyjmNeXcNVINp0R9Cic1IWfqXe3XEv/TIIN2gCmwCKw eXn5tPDRif/vSzGbTmSdcMCNe7Id9038xNGw/OgOhopVHY2T4hRgG5bamE1D1tmz 781iAZggbcOZ60Oo0daXogB8TowOb20WwIYGBmTD/RP51MnrhcRUAbJ7KFof+Hkk 9FRhq6sCcY3MU2C5BgUfRs4njWl1cv4PwsIQCEfBewWBruCd2CuPg5KbxA+LKJre lboPDc2ddSzLGwE/HUIUPPzgjhfJq9k8RFoeqqkMQJPwasoAdY4Wye0DZCKSayRI sLLiSJW6eP6vYNE2L6+6XMuRFPSp69+dovaGWrW6aqdfkf2+aPC5tsBHIkg5FZL4 Sos/jzhLtPp1O/M0ShbrpoMsZCeagpTf8A3fgwT+1BjYJI5f1wjg5JUsIpXjiWMw RDgM1cdIzZo19aZGmgk3CFnheIVy59ZrrPUDl59owxtPYo3ay1Tbkm7Uw/s7N8Xy z1ogf9/WA0vj/hh7occqRU0ACa0RQpw2HbD0jh3JR0IOaIea1SYkGSLxqi164QAP WmwsS761uGCGB0AZAGTzdYA9lvVlAScZjy/oZnOcc8mAiXi/RiDce0NzFHKzY5I3 jxW9deZx8Ec91XuTPt5h =4cwA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ID5h4+vKj8m6mVzk--