SHSelfHostIndex

Barman vs Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-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?
BA Barman Backup and recovery manager for PostgreSQL VS BA Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup Time Machine-style backups for Linux and macOS using rsync
FeatureBarmanBackup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-3.0MIT
LanguagePythonShell
Setup difficultyHardEasy
Min. RAM256 MB32 MB
Deploymentbare-metalbinary
GitHub stars★ 3,214★ 3,608
First released20122014
ReplacesVeeamTime Machine

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
Barman details

Choose Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (3.6k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Shell
Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Barman or Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup better?

Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Barman if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are Barman and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup free and open-source?

Yes. Barman is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Barman and Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup with Docker?

Barman: check the project docs for container support. Backup wrapper nono Backup-rsync-time-backup: check the project docs for container support.

Related comparisons