How a 2 AM Database Crash Led One Engineer to Build a Layered Backup Strategy

·1 views

A software engineer recounts how a silent failure in a nightly pg_dump cron job — caused by a full disk — nearly wiped out a week of production data. The incident prompted a search for a robust disaster-recovery approach with sub-second recovery point objectives and minute-level recovery time objectives. The solution combined daily physical base backups, continuous Write-Ahead Log archiving to off-site storage, and automated nightly restore tests to verify backup integrity. Tools such as wal-g were used to stream transaction logs to S3-compatible buckets and enable point-in-time recovery. The engineer emphasizes that all three components must work together, as any missing layer can render the entire backup strategy ineffective.

Read the full story at DEV Community

This is an AI-generated summary. ShortSingh links to the original source for the complete article.

Discussion (0)

Bootstrap 5 vs Tailwind CSS in 2026: A Practical Guide to Choosing the Right Framework

Bootstrap 5 and Tailwind CSS remain the two dominant CSS frameworks in 2026, each suited to different development needs. Bootstrap offers ready-made components like navbars, modals, and dropdowns, making it faster for admin dashboards, CRM panels, and Angular-based projects. Tailwind uses a utility-first approach that provides greater flexibility for custom design systems and integrates naturally with React and Next.js ecosystems, where libraries like shadcn/ui have grown widely popular. Bootstrap has a shallower learning curve and delivers consistent cross-browser results with minimal configuration, while Tailwind demands a stronger grasp of its philosophy but rewards teams with precise design control. In short, Bootstrap is the preferred choice for speed and consistency, whereas Tailwind excels when a highly customized or component-driven frontend is the priority.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingHacker News ·

AI Data Centers Consuming Far More Water Than Tech Companies Disclose

AI data centers are using significantly more water than major technology companies publicly report, according to a Wall Street Journal investigation. The facilities require large volumes of water primarily for cooling the powerful hardware that runs artificial intelligence workloads. This hidden consumption raises concerns about environmental transparency and resource sustainability in the fast-growing AI industry. The gap between actual water usage and disclosed figures suggests that current corporate reporting practices may be inadequate for assessing the true environmental footprint of AI infrastructure.

0 comments Read more at Hacker News

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

AI Coding Debate: Why Both Traditional Devs and Vibe Coders Have a Point

The software engineering community is increasingly divided between traditional developers, who stress discipline and architectural rigor, and 'vibe coders,' who prioritize speed and AI-assisted building. Traditional developers warn that AI tools, without proper oversight, generate code optimized for quick delivery rather than long-term stability, security, or scalability. Vibe coders counter that refusing to leverage powerful AI tools is an economically losing strategy, and that these tools have democratized software creation for non-technical builders. Commentators draw a historical parallel to earlier generations of developers who resisted high-level languages and modern frameworks, only for the industry to adapt and move forward. The emerging consensus is that the future of software development lies not in choosing one camp over the other, but in combining AI-driven speed with seasoned technical judgment.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community

ProgrammingDEV Community ·

How Bitcoin Achieves Consensus: From Transactions to a Shared Blockchain

Bitcoin's core innovation is enabling thousands of uncoordinated strangers to agree on a single shared transaction history without any central authority. Each network node maintains a mempool of validated but unconfirmed transactions, while mining nodes assemble these into candidate blocks and compete to add them to the chain. Block headers are kept at just 80 bytes and use a Merkle tree structure to compactly represent all transactions, allowing lightweight clients to verify payments without downloading the full blockchain. A block is only accepted if its double-SHA256 hash falls below a network-wide difficulty target, making valid blocks hard to produce but easy to verify — a deliberate asymmetry that deters spam and manipulation. The difficulty target adjusts automatically every 2,016 blocks to maintain an average 10-minute block interval, ensuring the network self-regulates as more miners join or leave.

0 comments Read more at DEV Community