3 ms·
Let's remember that JuiceFS can be setup very easily to not have a single point of failure (by replicating the metadata engine), meanwhile ZeroFS seems to have
by ChocolateGod 9mo ago
Let's remember that JuiceFS can be setup very easily to not have a single point of failure (by replicating the metadata engine), meanwhile ZeroFS seems to have exactly that.
If I was a company I know which one I'd prefer.
- __turbobrew__ 9mo agoYea, that is a big caveat to ZeroFS. Single point of failure. It is like saying I can write a faster etcd by only having a single node. Sure, that is possible, but the hard part of distributed systems is the coordination, and coordination always makes performance worse. I personally have went with Ceph for distributed storage. I personally have a lot more confidence in Ceph over JuiceFS and ZeroFS, but realize building and running a ceph cluster is more complex, but with that complexity you get much cheaper S3, block storage, and cephfs.
- suavesu 9mo agoSome users use JuiceFS with CephFS RADOS, as alternative with Ceph MDS.
- ChocolateGod 9mo agoI replaced a GlusterFS cluster with JuiceFS some years ago and it's been a relief. Just much easier to manage.