4 ms·

The closest thing I've seen to this is Jungle Disk, which is closed source, offers a less fully featured file system, but does have Windows and Mac clients.

by stubish 11y ago

_delirium 11y ago
There was also ObjectiveFS discussed on HN a few days ago, also closed source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10117506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10117506 Main difference appears to be that it supports concurrent mounts, while S3QL can be mounted by one client at a time.
- LeoPanthera 11y ago
  Surely the "main" difference is that ObjectiveFS is a paid service with prices starting at $7/mount. S3QL is FOSS.
porker 11y ago
JungleDisk works, but the clients are buggy PoS that crash/hang whenever they choose. I've also had JungleDisk's server daemon silently quit working & lock up on some servers, which is scary when you go to restore a file and realise no backups have happened in a while. It doesn't engender trust. That said, I still use it as it's easier & less error-prone than setting up my own backup system with tarsnap.
- jaytagdamian 11y ago
  The reporting is very poor also - if the backups don't run, you arent alerted to failure or success, they just dont appear on the emailed reports. Many a server has not been backed up because of this...
  - bretpiatt 11y ago
    Each backup job reports when successfully completed to provide an audit trail for your successful backups. If you are scheduled to run daily backups and you do not see the daily email the backup did not successfully run. We're open to understanding if there is a better behavior for this process. My worry is if we email on both cases people see the message come through and ignore the details where it shows 'failed'.
    - porker 11y ago
      Thanks for reaching out Bret. The issue I've found is it's much harder to monitor on an email NOT arriving, than one arriving with specific text. With the latter I can be as lazy as setting up a GMail fiter, with the former... I'd have to build my own reporting system that knows you'll email about 8-9am and if the email doesn't arrive, assume it's failed. That's a lot of overhead. How to best monitor something doesn't happen (e.g. a scheduled, remote job) is something I've yet to solve.
- lobster_johnson 11y ago
  Seconding this. I used Jungle for a while on my laptop, and it actually runs a local WebDAV server that acts as a caching proxy, which it then mounts as a local volume -- and it's horrible. Slow, unstable and prone to mysterious hangs and errors. This was a couple of years ago, but I wouldn't trust it unless they have completely rewritten it since then.
  - porker 11y ago
    > This was a couple of years ago, but I wouldn't trust it unless they have completely rewritten it since then. The software hasn't been updated since May 2011, when they released version 3.16.
- wesdunn 11y ago
  Wes from Jungle Disk here... If you're having issues with the JD service locking up, I would definitely hit up our support team, they're more than capable of helping out. https://support.jungledisk.com https://support.jungledisk.com As for the client being buggy, I'm not certain about what sorts of behavior you're seeing in the UI, but I will say that we're in the final testing phase of a release candidate for our Windows clients. For Linux, we have a beta out now. While it hasn't been totally re-written, all the underlying components have been brought up to date.

The closest thing I've seen to this is Jungle Disk, which is closed source, offers a less fully featured file system, but does have Windows and Mac clients.

by stubish 11y ago

The closest thing I've seen to this is Jungle Disk, which is closed source, offers a less fully featured file system, but does have Windows and Mac clients.

_delirium 11y ago

There was also ObjectiveFS discussed on HN a few days ago, also closed source: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10117506 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10117506 Main difference appears to be that it supports concurrent mounts, while S3QL can be mounted by one client at a time.

LeoPanthera 11y ago
Surely the "main" difference is that ObjectiveFS is a paid service with prices starting at $7/mount. S3QL is FOSS.

porker 11y ago

JungleDisk works, but the clients are buggy PoS that crash/hang whenever they choose. I've also had JungleDisk's server daemon silently quit working & lock up on some servers, which is scary when you go to restore a file and realise no backups have happened in a while. It doesn't engender trust. That said, I still use it as it's easier & less error-prone than setting up my own backup system with tarsnap.

jaytagdamian 11y ago
The reporting is very poor also - if the backups don't run, you arent alerted to failure or success, they just dont appear on the emailed reports. Many a server has not been backed up because of this...
- bretpiatt 11y ago
  Each backup job reports when successfully completed to provide an audit trail for your successful backups. If you are scheduled to run daily backups and you do not see the daily email the backup did not successfully run. We're open to understanding if there is a better behavior for this process. My worry is if we email on both cases people see the message come through and ignore the details where it shows 'failed'.
  - porker 11y ago
    Thanks for reaching out Bret. The issue I've found is it's much harder to monitor on an email NOT arriving, than one arriving with specific text. With the latter I can be as lazy as setting up a GMail fiter, with the former... I'd have to build my own reporting system that knows you'll email about 8-9am and if the email doesn't arrive, assume it's failed. That's a lot of overhead. How to best monitor something doesn't happen (e.g. a scheduled, remote job) is something I've yet to solve.
lobster_johnson 11y ago
Seconding this. I used Jungle for a while on my laptop, and it actually runs a local WebDAV server that acts as a caching proxy, which it then mounts as a local volume -- and it's horrible. Slow, unstable and prone to mysterious hangs and errors. This was a couple of years ago, but I wouldn't trust it unless they have completely rewritten it since then.
- porker 11y ago
  > This was a couple of years ago, but I wouldn't trust it unless they have completely rewritten it since then. The software hasn't been updated since May 2011, when they released version 3.16.
wesdunn 11y ago
Wes from Jungle Disk here... If you're having issues with the JD service locking up, I would definitely hit up our support team, they're more than capable of helping out. https://support.jungledisk.com https://support.jungledisk.com As for the client being buggy, I'm not certain about what sorts of behavior you're seeing in the UI, but I will say that we're in the final testing phase of a release candidate for our Windows clients. For Linux, we have a beta out now. While it hasn't been totally re-written, all the underlying components have been brought up to date.