btrbk vs Sanoid
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?
btrbk
Backup tool for Btrfs subvolume snapshots
VS
Sanoid
Policy-driven ZFS snapshot management and replication
| Feature | btrbk | Sanoid |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Perl | Perl |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 64 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, binary | bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,125 | ★ 3,830 |
| First released | 2014 | 2014 |
| Replaces | Time Machine | Time Machine |
Why pick each one
Choose btrbk if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Active community (2.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in Perl
- Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
Choose Sanoid if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Active community (3.8k GitHub stars)
- Written in Perl
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is btrbk or Sanoid better?
Neither is universally better. Sanoid has the larger community, while btrbk is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are btrbk and Sanoid free and open-source?
Yes. btrbk is licensed under GPL-3.0 and Sanoid under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run btrbk and Sanoid with Docker?
btrbk: check the project docs for container support. Sanoid: check the project docs for container support.