SHSelfHostIndex

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone vs rdiff-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 Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone Cross-platform backup tool with deduplication and encryption VS RD rdiff-backup Reverse-incremental backups preserving file history
FeatureBackblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalonerdiff-backup
Deploy effortRead-the-docs projectRead-the-docs project
CategoryBackup & RecoveryBackup & Recovery
LicenseGPL-3.0GPL-2.0
LanguageRustPython
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM256 MB64 MB
Deploymentbinarybinary
GitHub stars★ 500★ 1,267
First released20202001
ReplacesTime Machine, BackblazeTime Machine

What are Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and rdiff-backup?

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone

Pika Backup is a simple desktop backup application for GNOME built on BorgBackup. It focuses on protecting personal data with encrypted, deduplicated, and compressed backups.

  • GNOME desktop backup app
  • Encrypted Borg archives
  • Simple scheduling

rdiff-backup

rdiff-backup backs up one directory to another, keeping the latest copy plus reverse diffs for older versions. It preserves permissions, ownership, and special files while working over SSH.

  • Reverse-incremental storage
  • Preserves file metadata
  • Works over SSH

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone vs rdiff-backup: key differences

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is written in Rust, while rdiff-backup is built with Python. Licensing differs — GPL-3.0 for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone versus GPL-2.0 for rdiff-backup. Rdiff-backup is the lighter option, starting around 64 MB of RAM against 256 MB for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone. Rdiff-backup is the more established project (first released 2001), while Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone arrived in 2020. Rdiff-backup has the considerably larger community, at 1,267 GitHub stars versus 500.

Why pick each one

Choose Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone if…

  • Released under the GPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Written in Rust
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 256 MB RAM
Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone details

Choose rdiff-backup if…

  • Released under the GPL-2.0 license
  • Active community (1.3k GitHub stars)
  • Written in Python
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 64 MB RAM
rdiff-backup details

Frequently asked questions

Is Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone or rdiff-backup better?

Neither is universally better. rdiff-backup has the larger community, while Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and rdiff-backup free and open-source?

Yes. Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone is licensed under GPL-3.0 and rdiff-backup under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone and rdiff-backup with Docker?

Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone: check the project docs for container support. rdiff-backup: check the project docs for container support.

Which is lighter on resources, Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone or rdiff-backup?

rdiff-backup has the smaller minimum footprint at 64 MB of RAM, compared to about 256 MB for Backblaze alt Kopia-UI Standalone. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.

Related comparisons