News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Barman 2.0 Released by gbartolini on Thursday September 29, 2016 @06:49PM (#12609440)
Some food for thought. These are the first cases that came to my mind:

1) Zero data loss backups (as far as I know, Barman is the first backup tool for PostgreSQL to implement it)

2) Monitoring ('check' command)

3) Hybrid WAL shipping (archiving + streaming)

4) Incremental backups

5) Faster recovery time (backups are stored as plain files, you can have incremental recovery and you can use 'get-wal') - also we are working on parallel backup and recovery

6) Backup from a standby

In terms of management, Barman is very low maintenance, but the outcomes you get are relevant.

If you have multiple PostgreSQL servers, you can concentrate backups in a single Barman host. Every server can have its own settings allowing you to implement hybrid solutions (you can mix versions, backup methods such as rsync or pg_basebackup, WAL archiving, WAL streaming, and so on).

As said above by "amenonsen", with hook scripts you can also relay WAL files to S3 very easily, and create a backup of your backup.

That is why I think having a separate backup server has more pros than cons.

I hope this helps.

Re:Barman 2.0 Released by sandGorgon on Friday September 30, 2016 @01:08PM (#12613714)
thanks - this was very useful!