CKAN vs WAL-G

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?
FeatureCKANWAL-G
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseAGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguagePythonGo
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM512 MB256 MB
Deploymentbare-metaldocker, binary
GitHub stars★ 5,088★ 4,215
First released20262017
ReplacespgBackRest

Why pick each one

Choose CKAN if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • Mature project with 5.1k GitHub stars
  • Written in Python
  • Lightweight — runs in 512 MB RAM
CKAN details

Choose WAL-G if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Go
WAL-G details

Frequently asked questions

Is CKAN or WAL-G better?

CKAN is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler medium setup. Consider WAL-G if its specific feature set fits your needs better.

Are CKAN and WAL-G free and open-source?

Yes. CKAN is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and WAL-G under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run CKAN and WAL-G with Docker?

CKAN: check the project docs for container support. WAL-G: yes.

Related comparisons