If your DB is under few TB, you, probably, can go with WAL-E. We have thousands of clusters with total amount around 1PB of data. WAL-G is simple to set up, but

If your DB is under few TB, you, probably, can go with WAL-E. We have thousands of clusters with total amount around 1PB of data. WAL-G is simple to set up, but current CLI experience is far from perfect. Our goal is to make the most performant PostgreSQL backup system for cloud deployments. WAL-G is not just fast compression tool: we parallelize serial archive\restore interface and provide very cheap delta-backups. In PostgreSQL, you usually have PITR through WAL. If you have rare backups, your restore time is slow: WAL is applied serially. With WAL-G you can have delta-backups often, they are applied in parallel and much faster than WAL. This is important for us, because we have a bunch of distributed datacenters and from time to time we need to repair HA clusters from backups as fast as we can. Best regards, Andrey.