Postal vs Larch
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted mail servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Postal
Complete mail delivery platform for outgoing email
VS
Larch
Tool for one-time IMAP mailbox migration
| Feature | Postal | Larch |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Mail Servers | Mail Servers |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | Ruby | Ruby |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 2,048 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | binary, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 16,724 | ★ 616 |
| First released | 2017 | 2009 |
| Replaces | SendGrid, Mailgun, Postmark | Hosted migration services |
Why pick each one
Choose Larch if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Written in Ruby
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Postal or Larch better?
Neither is universally better. Postal has the larger community, while Larch is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Postal and Larch free and open-source?
Yes. Postal is licensed under MIT and Larch under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Postal and Larch with Docker?
Postal: yes. Larch: check the project docs for container support.