Ceph vs qrcp
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted file sync & storage options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Ceph
Distributed object, block, and file storage platform
VS
qrcp
Transfer files to and from phones by scanning a QR code
| Feature | Ceph | qrcp |
|---|---|---|
| Category | File Sync & Storage | File Sync & Storage |
| License | LGPL-2.1 | MIT |
| Language | C++ | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 4,096 MB | 64 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 16,905 | ★ 10,491 |
| First released | 2006 | 2018 |
| Replaces | Amazon S3, Google Drive | AirDrop, Snapdrop |
Why pick each one
Choose Ceph if…
- Released under the LGPL-2.1 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
- Mature project with 16.9k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is Ceph or qrcp better?
Neither is universally better. Ceph has the larger community, while qrcp is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Ceph and qrcp free and open-source?
Yes. Ceph is licensed under LGPL-2.1 and qrcp under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Ceph and qrcp with Docker?
Ceph: yes. qrcp: check the project docs for container support.