PostgreSQL Backup: pg_dumpall vs pg_basebackup Compared

When managing a PostgreSQL database in production, backup isn’t optional — it’s essential.
But with tools like pg_dumpall, pg_basebackup, and pg_dump, it’s easy to feel overwhelmed.
Which tool fits your environment best?

This post compares two commonly misunderstood options: pg_dumpall and pg_basebackup.

---

1. pg_dumpall – Logical Cluster-wide Backup

pg_dumpall creates a complete logical backup of your PostgreSQL cluster, meaning it exports data as SQL statements.

• Pros:

  • Highly portable (text-based SQL)

  • Compatible across PostgreSQL versions

  • Includes roles, permissions, and all databases

• Cons:

  • Slower on large datasets

  • Restores require recreating indexes, sequences, views

  • Doesn’t support Point-In-Time Recovery (PITR)

Use case: Migrating environments or creating a full SQL dump of all databases

pg_dumpall > all_backup.sql

2. pg_basebackup – Physical Cluster-level Backup

pg_basebackup performs a physical backup, copying the entire PostgreSQL data directory, including WAL (Write-Ahead Log) files.

• Pros:

  • Supports PITR when used with WAL archiving

  • Fast and snapshot-like

  • Ideal for initializing replicas

• Cons:

  • Must use same PostgreSQL version for recovery

  • Requires matching directory structure

  • Less portable (binary format)

Use case: Setting up replication or full-system disaster recovery

pg_basebackup -D /var/lib/postgresql/backup -Fp -Xs -P -v

---

Which One Should You Use?

---

Final Thoughts

• pg_dumpall = portable, flexible, slower

• pg_basebackup = faster, powerful for HA, but less flexible

👉 Choose based on your operational needs.
Backups are not just about saving — they’re about restoring.
And restoration strategy defines your infrastructure maturity.