Hacker News Reader

I’ve been using Vaultwarden for just myself for at least a couple of years now, and it’s at 32MB of disk space (<3MB of icon_cache, <1MB of database, the rest app). The current server process, at six weeks of uptime, is at just under five minutes of CPU time (average usage 0.01% of a core), and just under 24MB of memory used (RSS).

That’s feature.

(As a matter of fact, it’s grown quite a bit since I started using it; it used to be under 20MB of disk space and 10–15MB of RSS.)

Also running on PostgreSQL, not having to spin MSSQL instance

Well, you can opt into using PostgreSQL, but by default it’ll use SQLite, and that’s how I use it. More convenient and probably more efficient in general too.

I really miss seeing numbers like that. I'm in something like my 5th week of a Dropbox support ticket where they seem to think it reasonable that the headless client uses an extra 100MB of RAM every hour, eventually using 20-30GB of RAM, at which point I restart it and watch it start climbing again.

Not 'just a clone'. vaultwarden is based on a totally different platform, and is less resource hungry. In particular, it consumes much less RAM.

What's your point?