ObjectiveFS VS Azure File Storage

For workloads with many small files, it usually is better to store many files in a single object. Filesystems with regular POSIX semantics, such as atomic directory renames etc, also makes it easier to integrate with existing software. We have seen a lot of scientific computing usage of our filesystem (https://objectivefs.com) and as you mentioned localized caching of the working set is key to great performance. - Source: Hacker News / 8 months ago

Since this seems to be the crowd that would appreciate it - https://objectivefs.com/ is another good "shared files" option, it uses s3 in the background but has a client in the foreground that caches and checks for when/how to update s3 to minimize transfers and boost performance. Source: 10 months ago

Object storage is a higher-level abstraction than block-storage. FUSE and similar tech can do the job for basic requirements like read-only access by legacy applications but rarely works well for other scenarios. Object storage can be used decently well if there's more complex layer in between like https://objectivefs.com/. - Source: Hacker News / about 1 year ago

Azure Files perhaps? Or if you need frequently accessed files to be quicker then Azure File Sync. Source: 11 months ago

​To know more details: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/products/storage/files/. - Source: dev.to / about 1 year ago

If you have a use case that affords any kind of budget, maybe consder Azure Files. It is an SMB share you access over the internet. Basically, windows file server but hardened and entirely managed by Microsoft. This is as hands-off as it gets for an SMB share. Source: about 1 year ago

I have a client that (finally!) decided to go all-in on Azure; I had prepared the owner to expect additional costs based on their need for a file share -- I was expecting to have to use Azure Files. Source: over 1 year ago

I agree with the SharePoint, though another option would be Azure Files. Source: over 1 year ago