[HN Gopher] What's the best AWS S3 protocol alternative?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What's the best AWS S3 protocol alternative?
        
       That's it, with batteries included like file grant
       privilege/permission control, or presigned url with path support.
        
       Author : nickolov
       Score  : 37 points
       Date   : 2023-05-31 16:49 UTC (6 hours ago)
        
       | BlackLotus89 wrote:
       | If you are looking for an s3 protocol alternative it's probably
       | swift. [0]
       | 
       | There is no widespread software adoption like for s3.
       | 
       | If you want something that is accessible via http and that's it
       | take a look at seaweedfs? You can put files in over different
       | gateways but access it over http. The rights management is
       | probably not what you want. (You mentioned acls)
       | 
       | If you want some storage that you can access over http just setup
       | anything and use a webserver like nginx in front of it...
       | 
       | The other commenters are right and you need to be more specific
       | about your requirements.
       | 
       | Edit added link and some text I somehow missed [0]
       | https://docs.openstack.org/api-ref/object-store/index.html
        
         | neverartful wrote:
         | By 'swift', he's probably talking about OpenStack Swift [1].
         | 
         | [1] https://docs.openstack.org/swift/latest/
        
       | ZeroClickOk wrote:
       | askhn
        
       | anderspitman wrote:
       | Doesn't currently meet all the OPs requirements, but I've been
       | working on https://gemdrive.io/
        
       | CobrastanJorji wrote:
       | I'm not sure what "protocol alternative" means or what your goals
       | are, but it's worth suggesting that pretty much every other big
       | cloud provider offers an S3-compatible blob storage product. Are
       | you looking for something you can deploy yourself or just an
       | alternative to S3 itself in general?
        
       | bethecloud wrote:
       | Storj uplink package has benefits around parallelism, erasure-
       | coding, etc that improves on S3 protocol in many ways:
       | https://docs.storj.io/dcs/getting-started/quickstart-uplink-...
        
       | hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
       | Your question is unclear. Do you really mean the protocol, which
       | is also implemented in alternatives like MinIO, or the AWS
       | service?
        
       | Lucasoato wrote:
       | Has anyone tried remote HDFS?
        
       | joshxyz wrote:
       | seaweedfs
        
       | codemac wrote:
       | Protocol alternative? What are you specifically looking for?
       | 
       | It's object storage, the protocol is not that nuanced. Any other
       | storage product will have it's own quirks. google cloud storage
       | has an XML API that is similar enough and has signed urls, and
       | just about every enterprise storage company has an "object"
       | product.
        
       | UrbanPiper wrote:
       | Min.io is a good alternative. See https://min.io/download#/
        
       | pull_my_finger wrote:
       | Is there an actual S3 protocol definition/RFC anywhere? How does
       | one go about implementing an SDK or do most people just use AWS's
       | SDKs?
        
       | andrewmcwatters wrote:
       | Everyone seems to be using MinIO these days.
        
       | justinclift wrote:
       | Maybe Minio: https://github.com/minio/minio / https://min.io
       | 
       | I've only used it as a fairly straight forward object store
       | though, so not sure about privileges/permissions (etc).
        
       | anotherhue wrote:
       | You say protocol alternative, but assuming you're more concerned
       | with AWS as the host than S3 as the protocol you might try
       | https://github.com/minio/minio
       | 
       | If you do feel an aversion to the protocol then the rclone
       | backend list would be a good starting point
       | 
       | https://rclone.org/overview/
       | 
       | I like recent (v3) SMB over the network personally.
        
       | paulddraper wrote:
       | Is that
       | 
       | 1. "alternative implementation with the AWS S3 protocol"
       | 
       | 2. "alternative protocol with similar features to AWS S3"
       | 
       | ?
        
       | KaiserPro wrote:
       | Depends what you are after.
       | 
       | For public access, something like webDAV is probably the lowest
       | hanging fruit.
       | 
       | However its still HTTP based, so not great for speed or partial
       | writes.
       | 
       | HDFS is not worth the hassle, same goes for ceph, its a lot of
       | work for slower worse performance than ZFS/pNFS.
       | 
       | If you want speed and posix, then something like GPFS from IBM is
       | where to go, failing that, lustre, which you can get from AWS if
       | you want to try it.
        
         | bdcravens wrote:
         | The wording is a bit unclear, but I believe they were asking
         | for an alternative to AWS that still uses the S3 protocol, not
         | for an alternative to the S3 protocol.
        
           | speedgoose wrote:
           | I assumed the opposite. But now they has plenty of answers
           | for both cases.
        
       | bravetraveler wrote:
       | Just here to rant about 'S3 compliance' a little - I have no real
       | awareness on the topic at hand.
       | 
       | Tangentially this is lamenting at the _lack of choice_
       | 
       | Last night I tried to set up _BackBlaze_ (S3  'compatible')
       | behind Mattermost.
       | 
       | This doesn't go very far when clients use/rely on headers that
       | specifically mention vendorization
       | 
       | BackBlaze won't work with clients that try to send _x-amz-sdk-
       | checksum-algorithm_ , Mattermost taught me this
       | 
       | TLDR: S3 isn't always S3
        
         | toomuchtodo wrote:
         | Did you happen to submit this bug to Backblaze for triage? If
         | not, I'll get it to the right people!
         | 
         | > When you're using an SDK, you can set the value of the x-amz-
         | sdk-checksum-algorithm parameter to the algorithm that you want
         | Amazon S3 to use when calculating the checksum. Amazon S3
         | automatically calculates the checksum value.
         | 
         | > When you're using the REST API, you don't use the x-amz-sdk-
         | checksum-algorithm parameter. Instead, you use one of the
         | algorithm-specific headers (for example, x-amz-checksum-crc32).
         | 
         | https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/userguide/checki...
        
           | kpetermeni wrote:
           | +1
           | 
           | Please do. Backblaze lists x-amz-sdk-checksum-algorithm as
           | unsupported [1]. Would be great to have it supported to be
           | able to use it with Mattermost and other tools that use
           | min.io for S3.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.backblaze.com/b2/docs/s3_compatible_api.html
        
           | bravetraveler wrote:
           | I hadn't considered it! Your username is appropriate, too
           | much to do :D
           | 
           | My requirements are pretty low so I was likely to just let it
           | slide...
           | 
           | ...but with your help _(and perhaps from others on
           | understanding the pieces)_ , I'll consider it!
           | 
           | I'm remarkably unfamiliar with S3 style of services, only
           | occasionally trying to dabble
           | 
           | edit: The choosing of appropriate headers may come down to
           | Mattermost/clients -- BackBlaze might be technically doing
           | the right thing saying _" I don't know what to do with
           | these"_
        
         | jawngee wrote:
         | Backblaze is not a good choice for most things unless you were
         | using it strictly for backup. Their S3 compatibility, as is
         | most S3 compatibility, is a cruel joke last I looked at it.
         | 
         | I publish a mildly(?) popular offloading plugin for WordPress
         | and adding Backblaze support was my biggest regret.
        
       | LinuxBender wrote:
       | I believe Ceph [1][2] could be a good alternative. It can be self
       | hosted and I believe some cloud providers also offer it. Here are
       | some differences between S3 and Ceph [3].
       | 
       | [1] - https://ceph.io/en/
       | 
       | [2] - https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/radosgw/s3/
       | 
       | [3] - https://www.lightbitslabs.com/blog/ceph-storage/
        
         | antongribok wrote:
         | And incidentally Ceph supports both S3 and Swift (which I think
         | is the best S3 protocol alternative):
         | 
         | https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/radosgw/swift/
        
       | winrid wrote:
       | I've had good luck with Wasabi, no issues in past couple years so
       | far (around 5tb stored).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-05-31 23:02 UTC)