Tinyproxy vs Varnish Cache
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted reverse proxy & gateways options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Tinyproxy
Lightweight HTTP and HTTPS forward proxy daemon
VS
Varnish Cache
High-performance HTTP accelerator and caching proxy
| Feature | Tinyproxy | Varnish Cache |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Reverse Proxy & Gateways | Reverse Proxy & Gateways |
| License | GPL-2.0 | BSD-2-Clause |
| Language | C | C |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Hard |
| Min. RAM | 16 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal, source, docker | docker, binary, bare-metal |
| GitHub stars | ★ 5,951 | ★ 4,050 |
| First released | 1998 | 2006 |
| Replaces | Squid | Cloudflare, Squid |
Why pick each one
Choose Varnish Cache if…
- Released under the BSD-2-Clause license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (4k GitHub stars)
- Written in C
Frequently asked questions
Is Tinyproxy or Varnish Cache better?
Tinyproxy is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Varnish Cache if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Tinyproxy and Varnish Cache free and open-source?
Yes. Tinyproxy is licensed under GPL-2.0 and Varnish Cache under BSD-2-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Tinyproxy and Varnish Cache with Docker?
Tinyproxy: yes. Varnish Cache: yes.