starred/pgbackweb

Fork 0

mirror of https://github.com/eduardolat/pgbackweb.git synced 2026-04-25 05:35:57 +03:00

[GH-ISSUE #24] Support for other databases (mysql, mariadb, mongodb, sqlite, libsql, etc) #20

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-26 21:34:03 +03:00 by kerem · 6 comments

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:03 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @dalso0418 on GitHub (Aug 9, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/eduardolat/pgbackweb/issues/24

Hello.
It's a fantastic project.

Is it possible to support not only postgres but also other DBs such as mysql later?

Thank you.

Originally created by @dalso0418 on GitHub (Aug 9, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/eduardolat/pgbackweb/issues/24 Hello. It's a fantastic project. Is it possible to support not only postgres but also other DBs such as mysql later? Thank you.

kerem added the

enhancement

help wanted

question

labels

2026-02-26 21:34:03 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@edersong commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2024):

Pleaaase! 🙏🏽

@edersong commented on GitHub (Oct 28, 2024): Pleaaase! 🙏🏽

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@sitemapxml commented on GitHub (Nov 17, 2024):

I vote for this!

@eduardolat It would be wonderful if you would add support for MySQL/MariaDB.

At that point, you might want to rename project to dbbackweb 😄

@sitemapxml commented on GitHub (Nov 17, 2024): I vote for this! @eduardolat It would be wonderful if you would add support for MySQL/MariaDB. At that point, you might want to rename project to `dbbackweb` :smile:

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@Aesop7 commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2024):

Another vote for this. Off the top of my head, it would offer:

Centralized Backup Management: A single platform to look at for for multiple databases simplifies workflows
Consistent Backup Practices: Uniformity in backup procedures across different databases promotes reliability and ease of maintenance.
Broaden PGBackWeb's Adoption: Supporting a wider range of databases would attract a larger user base, fostering a more diverse and engaged community.

Would love to see this happen!

@Aesop7 commented on GitHub (Nov 23, 2024): Another vote for this. Off the top of my head, it would offer: - Centralized Backup Management: A single platform to look at for for multiple databases simplifies workflows - Consistent Backup Practices: Uniformity in backup procedures across different databases promotes reliability and ease of maintenance. - Broaden PGBackWeb's Adoption: Supporting a wider range of databases would attract a larger user base, fostering a more diverse and engaged community. Would love to see this happen!

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@eduardolat commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2024):

Hi everyone,

Thank you all for your interest in PG Back Web and for taking the time to suggest enhancements. I'm thrilled to hear that you find the project valuable.

I originally developed PG Back Web to address the need for a more user-friendly backup tool for PostgreSQL. PostgreSQL's truly open-source nature (license information) was a significant factor in this decision.

Supporting additional databases like MySQL, MariaDB, MongoDB, SQLite, etc., is indeed an exciting idea, and I understand how it could benefit many users by providing a centralized backup management solution. However, there are several considerations and challenges I'd like to share:

Naming and Branding: The current name, PG Back Web, is closely associated with PostgreSQL. Expanding support to other databases would necessitate a new name that accurately reflects the broader scope while maintaining recognition. I'm open to any suggestions you might have for a more inclusive name that conveys the purpose of the software.
Maintenance and Development Resources: Expanding the project's scope significantly increases the workload. As an individual contributor with limited time and multiple ongoing projects, I'm concerned about maintaining high-quality software across different database systems. I want to avoid compromising on quality or reliability. Therefore, I'm carefully considering how to manage development while maintaining the project's integrity.
Technical Challenges: Each database system has its unique features, backup mechanisms, and complexities. Additionally, databases often have multiple versions in use, each with its own nuances and behaviors. Providing a cohesive and unified user experience while handling these differences and ensuring compatibility across versions would be a significant challenge.
Community and Corporate Support: I'm also mindful that larger companies owning some of these databases might benefit from such a tool without contributing back to the project. It's important to consider how we can ensure the project's sustainability and possibly encourage support from the community and interested companies.

I'm open to discussing these points and exploring possible solutions. Your insights and suggestions are invaluable.

Do you have ideas for a new name that would encompass multiple databases?
What are your thoughts on the technical challenges involved in supporting multiple databases, including version management?
Are there other challenges you foresee in expanding the project to support multiple databases?
How do you think we can approach companies for support to ensure the project's sustainability?

Please feel free to share your opinions and ideas. Together, we can determine the best path forward for PG Back Web.

@eduardolat commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2024): Hi everyone, Thank you all for your interest in PG Back Web and for taking the time to suggest enhancements. I'm thrilled to hear that you find the project valuable. I originally developed PG Back Web to address the need for a more user-friendly backup tool for PostgreSQL. PostgreSQL's truly open-source nature ([license information](https://www.postgresql.org/about/licence/)) was a significant factor in this decision. Supporting additional databases like MySQL, MariaDB, MongoDB, SQLite, etc., is indeed an exciting idea, and I understand how it could benefit many users by providing a centralized backup management solution. However, there are several considerations and challenges I'd like to share: - **Naming and Branding**: The current name, **PG Back Web**, is closely associated with PostgreSQL. Expanding support to other databases would necessitate a new name that accurately reflects the broader scope while maintaining recognition. I'm open to any suggestions you might have for a more inclusive name that conveys the purpose of the software. - **Maintenance and Development Resources**: Expanding the project's scope significantly increases the workload. As an individual contributor with limited time and multiple ongoing projects, I'm concerned about maintaining high-quality software across different database systems. I want to avoid compromising on quality or reliability. Therefore, I'm carefully considering how to manage development while maintaining the project's integrity. - **Technical Challenges**: Each database system has its unique features, backup mechanisms, and complexities. Additionally, databases often have multiple versions in use, each with its own nuances and behaviors. Providing a cohesive and unified user experience while handling these differences and ensuring compatibility across versions would be a significant challenge. - **Community and Corporate Support**: I'm also mindful that larger companies owning some of these databases might benefit from such a tool without contributing back to the project. It's important to consider how we can ensure the project's sustainability and possibly encourage support from the community and interested companies. I'm open to discussing these points and exploring possible solutions. Your insights and suggestions are invaluable. - **Do you have ideas for a new name that would encompass multiple databases?** - **What are your thoughts on the technical challenges involved in supporting multiple databases, including version management?** - **Are there other challenges you foresee in expanding the project to support multiple databases?** - **How do you think we can approach companies for support to ensure the project's sustainability?** Please feel free to share your opinions and ideas. Together, we can determine the best path forward for PG Back Web.

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@causefx commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2024):

well written response. i appreciate what you do.

@causefx commented on GitHub (Nov 24, 2024): well written response. i appreciate what you do.

kerem commented

2026-02-26 21:34:04 +03:00

Author

Owner

@sitemapxml commented on GitHub (Nov 9, 2025):

I'm a few months late, but since there were no new comments, here is mine.

@ChetSocio Your comment seems suspicious. What are your intents, actually? Do you want to take over this project or just promote your SaaS?

@sitemapxml commented on GitHub (Nov 9, 2025): I'm a few months late, but since there were no new comments, here is mine. @ChetSocio Your comment seems suspicious. What are your intents, actually? Do you want to take over this project or just promote your SaaS?

kerem referenced this issue

2026-02-26 21:34:38 +03:00

[PR #20] [MERGED] Feat/restore backups #141