I'm reading between the lines here, and I'd love for Chris Lu (the SeaweedFS author) to chime in here and correct me, but it seems like Chris read Facebook's Ha

I'm reading between the lines here, and I'd love for Chris Lu (the SeaweedFS author) to chime in here and correct me, but it seems like Chris read Facebook's Haystack paper and decided to implement it himself in Go. Kind of how Riak started as "let's take the DynamoDB paper and implement it in Erlang." The README mentions that Seaweed is much easier to set up than Ceph. The more apt comparison would be the RADOS component of Ceph--both Seaweed and RADOS are key/value oriented. I've now set up both, and for sure Seaweed is easier to get going. I have a fair bit of experience with RADOS (all quite positive) but I really do appreciate the ease of use Seaweed presents. I've only been using it for an hour or so, just doing benchmarks and walking through fault scenarios, and so far Seaweed looks quite good! FWIW, I don't think this should be called a filesystem at all. Seaweed isn't a filesystem which forsakes some aspects of POSIX, it's nothing like a filesystem. The more proper term would be "distributed object store."