Barman vs pgBackWeb
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
pgBackWeb
Web interface for scheduling PostgreSQL backups
| Feature | Barman | pgBackWeb |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | Python | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 3,214 | ★ 2,615 |
| First released | 2012 | 2024 |
| Replaces | Veeam | AWS RDS Backups |
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 pgBackWeb if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (2.6k GitHub stars)
Frequently asked questions
Is Barman or pgBackWeb better?
Neither is universally better. Barman has the larger community, while pgBackWeb is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Barman and pgBackWeb free and open-source?
Yes. Barman is licensed under GPL-3.0 and pgBackWeb under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Barman and pgBackWeb with Docker?
Barman: check the project docs for container support. pgBackWeb: yes.