Re: wal-g (https://github.com/wal-g/wal-g) reliability

Greetings,

* Victor Sudakov (vas(at)sibptus(dot)ru) wrote:
> 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.

Right- as I mentioned above, that's an option which pgbackrest has.

> > 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.

If you have a restore_command configured to be able to pull from a full
repo that has all the new WAL, sure, but the idea behind archive-copy is
specifically that you can pull out that backup and restore it *without*
having to have access to the original repo. If the assumption is that
you've got access to the full repo, then archive-copy isn't really
gaining you anything and it wouldn't make sense to use it.

Thanks,

Stephen