{"id":7083,"date":"2016-02-09T19:19:56","date_gmt":"2016-02-09T18:19:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.dbi-services.com\/blog\/the-dbi-services-postgresql-reference-architecture-2-the-community-approach\/"},"modified":"2016-02-09T19:19:56","modified_gmt":"2016-02-09T18:19:56","slug":"the-dbi-services-postgresql-reference-architecture-2-the-community-approach","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.dbi-services.com\/blog\/the-dbi-services-postgresql-reference-architecture-2-the-community-approach\/","title":{"rendered":"The dbi services PostgreSQL reference architecture (2) – The community approach"},"content":{"rendered":"

In the last post<\/a> I looked at how dbi services designs a PostgreSQL architecture based on the products of EnterpriseDB<\/a>. In this post I’ll look at the same questions but using pure community tools. If you do not need vendor support and do trust the community for providing help and fixes this is another way to go. And usually you can trust the community around PostgreSQL very well. The architecture itself is pretty much the same as in the last post. The tools are different.<\/p>\n

As in the last post there is a “minimal” configuration:<\/p>\n

\"pg_ref_community_minimal\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The picture is almost the same as with the commercial approach. The only little thing that changed is the backup and recovery tool: This time it is Barman<\/a> instead of BART. As just one tool changes but not the architecture as a whole the same restrictions apply as with the commercial setup:<\/p>\n