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

Nikolay Samokhvalov wrote:
> In short, it's reliable and battle-tested. It's used in companies such as
> Yandex.Cloud and GitLab.com, successfully.

Nikolay, don't you mind another question?

I'm used to the fact that "pg_basebackup -X" creates a self-sufficient
backup of a cluster which can be started right away as it contains all
the WAL files required for recovery. `touch recovery.signal` is never necessary,
and `touch standby.signal` is optional (when you do PITR etc).

It's not the case with wal-g, the result of the `wal-g backup-fetch`
command requires `touch recovery.signal` and a restore_command
configured to fetch WALs from the wal-g storage.

I have also noticed that wal-g keeps pg_control in a separate tar
archive, and keeps a lot of metadata.

The questions are:

1. If the metadata in the wal-g storage ever becomes corrupt, will I be
able to restore the database manually from the archives in
$WALG_*_PREFIX/{basebackups,wal}_005/ ?

2. Is there a `wal-g backup-fetch` option for truly self-sufficient
restoration?

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