SeaweedFS vs SparkleShare

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?
FeatureSeaweedFSSparkleShare
CategoryFile Sync & StorageFile Sync & Storage
LicenseApache-2.0GPL-3.0
LanguageGoC#
Setup difficultyHardMedium
Min. RAM512 MB128 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, binarybare-metal, binary
GitHub stars★ 33,952★ 4,971
First released20152010
ReplacesAmazon S3Dropbox

Why pick each one

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

Choose SparkleShare if…

  • Full history of every change
  • Works over plain SSH
SparkleShare details

Frequently asked questions

Is SeaweedFS or SparkleShare better?

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

Are SeaweedFS and SparkleShare free and open-source?

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

Can I run SeaweedFS and SparkleShare with Docker?

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

Related comparisons