Backrest vs rsnapshot
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
rsnapshot
Filesystem snapshot utility based on rsync
| Feature | Backrest | rsnapshot |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | TypeScript | Perl |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 7,071 | ★ 3,662 |
| First released | 2024 | 2003 |
| Replaces | Backblaze | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose rsnapshot if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Active community (3.7k GitHub stars)
- Written in Perl
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Backrest or rsnapshot better?
Backrest is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider rsnapshot if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Backrest and rsnapshot free and open-source?
Yes. Backrest is licensed under GPL-3.0 and rsnapshot under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Backrest and rsnapshot with Docker?
Backrest: yes. rsnapshot: check the project docs for container support.