Timeshift 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?
Timeshift
System restore tool for Linux using snapshots
VS
WAL-G
Archival and restoration tool for databases
| Feature | Timeshift | WAL-G |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Backup & Recovery | Backup & Recovery |
| License | GPL-3.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Vala | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 128 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | binary, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 4,219 | ★ 4,215 |
| First released | 2014 | 2017 |
| Replaces | Time Machine, System Restore | pgBackRest |
Why pick each one
Choose Timeshift if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Active community (4.2k GitHub stars)
- Written in Vala
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
Frequently asked questions
Is Timeshift or WAL-G better?
Timeshift is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider WAL-G if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Timeshift and WAL-G free and open-source?
Yes. Timeshift is licensed under GPL-3.0 and WAL-G under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Timeshift and WAL-G with Docker?
Timeshift: check the project docs for container support. WAL-G: yes.