Seafile 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?
FeatureSeafileSeaweedFS
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseAGPL-3.0Apache-2.0
LanguageCGo
Setup difficultyMediumHard
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metaldocker, kubernetes, binary
GitHub stars★ 15,077★ 33,952
First released20122015
ReplacesDropbox, Google DriveAmazon S3

Why pick each one

Choose Seafile if…

  • Excellent sync performance
  • Stable and battle-tested
  • Good for large libraries
Seafile 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 Seafile or SeaweedFS better?

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

Are Seafile and SeaweedFS free and open-source?

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

Can I run Seafile and SeaweedFS with Docker?

Seafile: yes. SeaweedFS: yes.

Related comparisons