Bacula vs. BackupPC [closed]

Posted by ujjain on Server Fault See other posts from Server Fault or by ujjain
Published on 2011-06-20T15:15:19Z Indexed on 2012/10/17 11:04 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 330

Filed under:
|
|
|
|

I have been googling about the differences between them.

  • Bacula has lots of roles
  • BackupPC is easier to configure
  • Bacula works with agent, not rsync (great for Windows backups)

It seems that Bacula is most often compared to Amanda though, while BackupPC seems a perfectly lovely and popular backup distribution to.

I currently backup my servers with rsnapshot, but I am looking for a professional scalable solution that could also back-up 50 hosts without problems. Preferably a solution that can offer bare metal restores for my Linux servers. I am not looking to reinstall the exact same version of Plesk, the software, etc...

Update: I see this ranks high in Google, I found a good article: http://www.serverfocus.org/backuppc-vs-bacula-vs-amanda. I personally think that BackupPC is good for smaller environment, but Bacula, despite the high learning curve, is better for environments that requilre scaling.

© Server Fault or respective owner

Related posts about backup

Related posts about debian