3 ms·
Had a really long conversation with some remarkably smart folks about this. Here are the pros: 1. It's a tool folks use; and being able to use it in AWS/Azure
by late2part 8y ago
Had a really long conversation with some remarkably smart folks about this.
Here are the pros:
1. It's a tool folks use; and being able to use it in AWS/Azure/GCP/etc would be useful
2. When folks use a tool they know, and need more capacity/locations, it'd be nice to be able to 'cloudburst' into AWS/Azure/GCP/etc
Here are the Cons:
1. Smarty pants folks can come up with many theoretical and plausible solutions for anything FreeNAS can do in AWS using proprietary lockin solutions from AWS. If you just reformulate your requirements, there's another solution you can use instead of FreeNAS
2. ZFS is good at helping with diverse physical volumes and this paradigm is moot with AWS EBS volumes (as they are not physical volumes). However, this argument reduces to "don't do parity/erasure coding across EBS volumes."
So, reply here if you want it and I'll work w/ some folks to make it happen.
In my case, there are a lot of places where we use disparately multitiered storage on freenas/zfs/filesystem($foo) and sometimes it makes sense to temporarily "cloudburst" into AWS while waiting hardware to support the load.