Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 09:47:02 +0700
From: Victor Sudakov <vas@sibptus.ru>
To: pgsql-admin@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: wal-g (https://github.com/wal-g/wal-g) reliability
Message-ID: <YCH3pqahVncfF2O2@admin.sibptus.ru>
References: <YB0VuB8RJAKvTI6+@admin.sibptus.ru>
 <CANNMO++t7hLG2Uk-M61ohXGNhBYszSPL8vn=zP09tcRv15QB4A@mail.gmail.com>
 <YCDKyYzrv4HQZz9t@admin.sibptus.ru>
 <20210208212840.GW27507@tamriel.snowman.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20210208212840.GW27507@tamriel.snowman.net>
Precedence: bulk

Stephen Frost wrote:
> > 
> > 2. Is there a `wal-g backup-fetch` option for truly self-sufficient
> > restoration?
> 
> Interesting that you ask this!  I say that because it's actually a case
> that pgbackrest contemplated and explicitly added support for-
> specifically, if you set --archive-copy (or archive-copy=true) and
> disable compression (or decompress everything before you start PG), then
> you can just start PG from the backup and it'll perform the necessary
> recovery from the WAL and start up.  We considered this an interesting
> use-case and used it extensively and have maintained support for it.

Well, the release I've downloaded from https://github.com/wal-g/wal-g/releases
does not seem to have the --archive-copy option.
> 
> All that said, of course, this limits the ability to do typical PITR,

Why? If you configure recovery_target_time and restore_command, it's all
the same, isn't it? No matter if you have WAL archives in pg_wal, but
it's better to have them.

> but at least it gives you a consistent backup which you can start PG
> from.
> 

-- 
Victor Sudakov,  VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN
2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/