Bareos vs Barman
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?
| Feature | Bareos | Barman |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | C++ | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 1,232 | ★ 3,214 |
| First released | 2010 | 2012 |
| Replaces | Veeam, CommVault | Veeam |
Why pick each one
Choose Bareos if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in C++
Choose Barman if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Active community (3.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in Python
- Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Bareos or Barman better?
Neither is universally better. Barman has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Bareos and Barman free and open-source?
Yes. Bareos is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Barman under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Bareos and Barman with Docker?
Bareos: yes. Barman: check the project docs for container support.