Backrest vs rdiff-backup
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted backup & recovery options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Backrest
Web UI and orchestrator for Restic backups
VS
rdiff-backup
Reverse-incremental backups preserving file history
| Feature | Backrest | rdiff-backup |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | TypeScript | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,071 | ★ 1,264 |
| First released | 2024 | 2001 |
| Replaces | Backblaze | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose rdiff-backup if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Active community (1.3k GitHub stars)
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Backrest or rdiff-backup better?
Backrest is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider rdiff-backup if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Backrest and rdiff-backup free and open-source?
Yes. Backrest is licensed under GPL-3.0 and rdiff-backup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Backrest and rdiff-backup with Docker?
Backrest: yes. rdiff-backup: check the project docs for container support.