Barman vs Open Archiver
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?
Barman
Backup and recovery manager for PostgreSQL
VS
Open Archiver
Email archiving solution with full-text search and eDiscovery search
| Feature | Barman | Open Archiver |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Python | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,214 | ★ 2,224 |
| First released | 2012 | 2026 |
| Replaces | Veeam | — |
Why pick each one
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
Choose Open Archiver if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (2.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in TypeScript
Frequently asked questions
Is Barman or Open Archiver better?
Neither is universally better. Barman has the larger community, while Open Archiver is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Barman and Open Archiver free and open-source?
Yes. Barman is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Open Archiver under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Barman and Open Archiver with Docker?
Barman: check the project docs for container support. Open Archiver: yes.