Table of contents
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
Do you know an article comparing ObjectiveFS to other products?
Suggest a link to a post with product alternatives.
This is an informative page about ObjectiveFS. You can review and discuss the product here. The primary details have not been verified within the last quarter, and they might be outdated. If you think we are missing something, please use the means on this page to comment or suggest changes. All reviews and comments are highly encouranged and appreciated as they help everyone in the community to make an informed choice. Please always be kind and objective when evaluating a product and sharing your opinion.
