RcloneView 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?
FeatureRcloneViewSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0Apache-2.0
LanguageC++Go
Setup difficultyEasyHard
Min. RAM256 MB512 MB
Deploymentbinarydocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 2,941★ 33,952
First released20172015
ReplacesMountain Duck, CyberduckAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose RcloneView if…

  • Released under the Apache-2.0 license
  • Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
  • Active community (2.9k GitHub stars)
  • Written in C++
RcloneView 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 RcloneView or SeaweedFS better?

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

Are RcloneView and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

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

Can I run RcloneView and SeaweedFS with Docker?

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

Related comparisons