Re: WAL Archiving and base backup

On 1/16/22 01:23, Mladen Gogala wrote:
> On 1/14/22 16:00, David G. Johnston wrote:
>> I still don't really understand what is so great about it.  About its 
>> only redeeming feature is a declaration that "it is in core" and that 
>> newcomers can just default to it without thinking.  I'd rather just 
>> play favorites and write "use pgbackrest" in our documentation.  Or 
>> some hybrid approach where we don't just pick one but instead guide 
>> people to the community solutions that are out there.  I don't think I 
>> really want the people responsible for core to spend time on writing 
>> end-user backup tooling. Their time is much more valuably spent 
>> working on the core product.
>>
>> David J.
>>
> Well, the "without thinking" part of your post can be rephrased as "ease 
> of use". Do database administrators really need to think about which 
> backup software to use? What kind of knowledge will such an evaluation 
> provide? All commercial databases have some form of backup software 
> included into the core database. After all, backup and restore are 
> extremely important functions which IMHO should be provided along with 
> the database software.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mladen Gogala
> Database Consultant
> Tel: (347) 321-1217
> https://dbwhisperer.wordpress.com
> 


Just to avoid any misunderstanding. I am perfectly happy using the 
backup/restore with pg_dump and we use it for at least a decade with 
success for our need of backups.

My question is really in the context of WAL archiving and preparing a 
slave instance with a base 'non-exclusive' backup from a script (to be 
precise, on reboot of the server running the slave instance) since the 
exclusive way is deprecated.

Thx for all your valuable comments
--
Issa