Top 5 PostgreSQL backup tools in 2025

PostgreSQL has become the backbone of many production systems in 2025 — powering SaaS platforms, analytics pipelines, and high-availability databases across cloud and on-premise infrastructures. With this growing adoption comes the critical need for reliable, automated backup solutions that ensure minimal downtime and data loss.

While PostgreSQL ships with built-in tools like pg_dump and pg_basebackup, production environments demand more: automation, retention policies, compression, incremental backups, cloud storage integration, and verification of backup integrity.

This article reviews the top 5 open-source PostgreSQL backup tools in 2025, comparing them by functionality, performance, and usability. Each tool has its strengths — from enterprise-grade systems like pgBackRest and Barman to lightweight, modern options like Postgresus.

We’ll break down their technical capabilities, list key pros and cons, and highlight Postgresus as the most balanced solution for modern DevOps teams seeking simplicity and reliability in their PostgreSQL backup strategy.

1. Postgresus

Postgresus is a self-hosted, open-source PostgreSQL backup and monitoring tool with a web UI. It focuses on simple, reliable full backups: you set schedules in the UI, it runs backups, stores them locally or in object storage, and lets you restore with one click. It’s shipped as a Docker container and is aimed at DevOps teams and developers who want a “set it and forget it” backup solution without diving deep into custom scripting.

Pros:

• Web UI with schedules, history, status, and one-click restore
• Easy deployment (single container) and simple configuration
• Supports multiple storage targets (local disk, S3-compatible, cloud drives, NAS, etc.)
• Built-in notifications (email/messengers) about backup success/failure
• Open source and self-hosted, data stays under your control
• Build-in compression for 8–16 times
• Suitable for DevOps or DBAs team

Cons:

• No point-in-time recovery (PITR); full backups only
• No incremental/differential backups — every run is a full backup (planning in 2025)
• Less battle-tested on multi-TB clusters than pgBackRest/Barman

2. pgBackRest

pgBackRest is a high-performance, enterprise-grade PostgreSQL backup and restore tool. It works at the physical level (data files + WAL), supports full, differential, and incremental backups, and is optimized for very large databases. It’s heavily used in production by many companies and integrates well with Kubernetes operators and managed Postgres stacks.

Pros:

• Full, differential, and incremental backups with PITR
• Parallel backup and restore, good performance on large clusters
• Built-in compression (LZ4/Zstd/etc.) and repository encryption
• Flexible repository layout with support for local and object storage
• Widely adopted, strong ecosystem and documentation

Cons:

• Steeper learning curve and more complex configuration
• CLI-only; no built-in web UI
• Repository format and config can be intimidating for small teams
• Overkill for very small or non-critical databases

3. Barman

Barman (Backup and Recovery Manager) is a Python-based system for centralized management of PostgreSQL physical backups. It’s typically installed on a dedicated backup server that pulls or receives backups and WAL from multiple PostgreSQL instances. It’s very suitable for traditional on-prem or hybrid environments where a DBA team manages many databases.

Pros:

• Central backup server for many PostgreSQL instances
• Physical backups with WAL archiving and PITR
• Incremental backups (rsync/hard-link based; newer versions also support newer Postgres backup APIs)
• Retention policies and housekeeping (delete old backups/WAL)
• Can push backups and WAL to cloud object storage via Barman-cloud

Cons:

• Requires a separate backup server and more moving parts
• Slower and less “tuned” than pgBackRest for some very large deployments
• CLI-driven; no native web UI
• Configuration is somewhat verbose, especially with many clusters

1. WAL-G

WAL-G is a Go-based backup and WAL archiving tool designed for cloud-first environments. For PostgreSQL, it periodically takes physical base backups and continuously archives WAL segments directly to object storage (S3, GCS, Azure, S3-compatible). It also supports delta/incremental backups and can restore to arbitrary points in time by replaying WAL.

Pros:

• Cloud-native: streams backups and WAL directly to object storage
• Supports PITR and delta/incremental backups
• Parallel compression and upload/download, very fast on good networks
• Single static binary, easy to package in containers
• Can also be used for other databases (MySQL/MariaDB, SQL Server, etc.) in mixed environments

Cons:

• No web UI; everything is CLI + environment variables
• Primarily designed for object storage; pure local-disk workflows are less natural
• Restore flow is more manual compared to an integrated UI-driven tool
• Requires solid understanding of WAL and PITR to operate confidently

5. PgBackWeb (UFO backup)

UFO Backup is an open-source web GUI for PostgreSQL backups. It uses pg_dump under the hood, creating logical backups (plain SQL dumps). You configure connections through the UI, set schedules, and it runs dumps to local disk or S3-compatible storage. It’s aimed at teams that want an extremely simple, web-based backup dashboard.

Pros:

• Very simple web interface, minimal PostgreSQL knowledge required
• Easy Docker deployment for quick setup
• Logical backups produce portable SQL files that can be restored with psql

Cons:

• Less performant as other solutions
• No PITR or WAL archiving; only full logical dumps
• No incremental or differential backups; large databases become slow to back up/restore
• No parallel dump support, so performance is limited for big databases
• Fewer “enterprise” features (RBAC, multi-tenant management) than other tools

Conclusion

PostgreSQL backup tooling in 2025 offers a rich spectrum — from powerful, low-level utilities to modern, self-hosted automation platforms. Choosing the right one depends on your infrastructure scale, RPO/RTO targets, and operational maturity.

For most modern teams, Postgresus stands out as the most practical, all-around solution. It delivers a self-hosted web interface, automated scheduling, and multi-storage support while remaining fully open source and easy to deploy.

If your workloads demand high-performance physical backups with fine-grained incremental recovery, pgBackRest remains the gold standard. Barman suits enterprise environments with many servers and long-term retention needs. WAL-G is ideal for cloud-native and multi-database setups requiring continuous archiving. And for smaller projects or non-technical users, PG Back Web (UFO Backup) provides the simplest graphical alternative.

Ultimately, a robust PostgreSQL backup strategy combines automation, off-site storage, integrity verification, and clear restore procedures. The tools above cover these pillars at different levels of complexity — but with Postgresus leading the new generation of open-source solutions, setting up reliable PostgreSQL backups has never been easier.