Would my data be safer in a managed database?
Asked by Ryan Carpenter:

This question is an extension of [best practices for database setup](https://community.atlassian.com/t5/Confluence-questions/Best-Practice-for-Database-setup/qaq-p/649672 "Best Practices for Database Setup"), which discusses whether to install Confluence and its database on the same or separate servers. I use Confluence with PostgreSQL (on the same server), while relying on my own 'enthusiast' level of server admin skill to keep things running smoothly. I get by, but there is always a risk of error, so my question is this:

With Linux server and Confluence maintenance in the hands of a relative amateur, would putting the data in a separate *managed* server have merit, or just add complexity?

Regular backups are a given, of course, and I understand that no place is 'safe' from potential data loss. I am merely asking if a managed database might provide a modicum of additional protection or convenience, for instance, when upgrading Confluence or the server operating system.


Answers:
author: DPKJ
body: This is just a personal preference, and policies that are imposed by your organization.

* My thumb rule is, "How often service updates database?"  
  * So, if I see database updates are very often like once per 20 minutes (during peak) I will go with separate machine.
  * I do this so that I can update database server and application server separately. (things can go sideways during this)
* Maintaining separate machine just for the DB is always an overhead though, so
  * I also see if I can merge DB's of two-three services on one DB machine.
  * If I can get high performance machine (because with network overhead, your service will definitely slower)

And finally, I maintain both kind Confluence instance, and I have not face issue with them (especially, after switching to Postgres). But for new instances (now a days when you can have multi-core machine for very cheap), I don't want maintain overhead of DB machine, its security, its update regime, etc.

comments: author: Ryan Carpenter
body: Thanks [@DPKJ](/t5/user/viewprofilepage/user-id/690016), this is helpful. We are talking about a 10-user Confluence license on Digital Ocean servers with only a couple of users logged in at once, so a single machine can definitely do the job. I am the primary user, the admin, and the organization.

The main point was meant to be about what you said---that is, separating the database from Confluence server updates that might go sideways. To clarify, the comparison is between:

(a) Self-managed Confluence + fully managed Postgres  
(b) Self-managed Confluence with self-managed Postgres on one machine.

I was not considering:

(c) Self-managed Confluence + self-managed Postgres on separate machines.

Is this how you understood my question? If so, it sounds like I should keep the arrangement simple and put Confluence and Postgres on the same server (Option B). If I take a snapshot before doing any upgrades, test any major changes on a non-production copy, and keep this fantastic community at the top of my bookmarks I may stand a reasonable chance of avoiding catastrophe!


author: DPKJ
body: Oh! I was talking about both self-managed Confluence and Postgres (i.e. option C).

But I think for 10 user instance option B is the best. It will keep your cost down, and with scheduled backup of DB and Confluence Home, you can avoid almost all unforeseen situations.

You can learn about recommended backup practices here - <https://confluence.atlassian.com/doc/production-backup-strategy-38797389.html>

In the end, thanks for the kind words about the community. We try to keep it simple here, so please don't hesitate to ask or share your knowledge with us.


Tags: confluence-server

server