Feber vs SeaweedFS

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?
FeatureFeberSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseAGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguageGo
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM50 MB512 MB
Deploymentbare-metaldocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 33,952
First released20242015
ReplacesAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose Feber if…

  • Released under the AGPL-3.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Tiny footprint — runs in 50 MB RAM
Feber details

Choose SeaweedFS if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Kubernetes-ready with Helm charts available
  • Mature project with 34k GitHub stars
SeaweedFS details

Frequently asked questions

Is Feber or SeaweedFS better?

Neither is universally better. SeaweedFS has the larger community, while Feber is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.

Are Feber and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

Yes. Feber is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and SeaweedFS under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Feber and SeaweedFS with Docker?

Feber: check the project docs for container support. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons