ByteStash vs pasty
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted pastebins & snippets options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
ByteStash
Pastebin and file storage service with a simple web interface
VS
pasty
Fast and lightweight code-pasting server
| Feature | ByteStash | pasty |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Pastebins & Snippets | Pastebins & Snippets |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Language | TypeScript | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 2,514 | ★ 222 |
| First released | 2026 | 2020 |
| Replaces | — | Pastebin.com |
Why pick each one
Choose ByteStash if…
- Released under the GPL-3.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (2.5k GitHub stars)
- Written in TypeScript
Choose pasty if…
- Released under the MIT license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is ByteStash or pasty better?
Neither is universally better. ByteStash has the larger community, while pasty is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are ByteStash and pasty free and open-source?
Yes. ByteStash is licensed under GPL-3.0 and pasty under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run ByteStash and pasty with Docker?
ByteStash: yes. pasty: yes.