pgBackRest vs zrepl
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?
pgBackRest
Reliable backup and restore solution for PostgreSQL
VS
zrepl
Automated ZFS snapshot replication and pruning
| Feature | pgBackRest | zrepl |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | C | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 4,296 | ★ 1,151 |
| First released | 2013 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Veeam | Veeam |
Why pick each one
Choose pgBackRest if…
- Released under the MIT license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (4.3k GitHub stars)
- Written in C
Choose zrepl if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Active community (1.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is pgBackRest or zrepl better?
Neither is universally better. pgBackRest has the larger community, while zrepl is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are pgBackRest and zrepl free and open-source?
Yes. pgBackRest is licensed under MIT and zrepl under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run pgBackRest and zrepl with Docker?
pgBackRest: yes. zrepl: check the project docs for container support.