Andrey Borodin wrote: > > Thanks, Nikolay, I'm pleased to read good things about project I maintain. > > I'll add some Pros and Cons of WAL-G from my side. > > Pros: > WAL-G is very efficient. At Y.Cloud we have few petabytes of PG, 12K+ of hosts. Each cluster is backuped every night (with deltas) and network cost us real moneys (our datacenters are in different countries BTW). This is our data and we highly value each byte. So we aim to make WAL-G 100% safe and tested. > WAL-G works with PG, MySQL, MongoDB, FDB and MS SQL Server. And almost any storage (cloud, file system or scp). WAL-G does not need any extra space near database. > > Cons: > We are not PG vendor. We contribute to PG ecosystem to make our systems better and reduce risks for Yandex.Cloud customers. You are not expected to buy commercial support for WAL-G from us directly. Though community behind WAL-G is big enough and there are many hackers who can implement feature you want. > And as a result, docs are not very detailed. We would appreciate any docs enhancements. I'm considering WAL-G now, not as a backup solution per se, but as an advanced WAL archiver which can: 1. Upload/download WALs directly to S3 2. Verify WALs integrity (a very nice feature, but I think does not work if there are no backups) 3. Prevent WAL overwrite (does it work?) 4. Concurrently download WALs to speed up recovery. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN 2:5005/49@fidonet http://vas.tomsk.ru/
