top | item 47000980

(no title)

bojangleslover | 16 days ago

Completely different situations. None of the MinIO team worked for free. MinIO is a COSS company (commercial open source software). They give a basic version of it away for free hoping that some people, usually at companies, will want to pay for the premium features. MinIO going closed source is a business decision and there is nothing wrong with that.

I highly recommend SeaweedFS. I used it in production for a long time before partnering with Wasabi. We still have SeaweedFS for a scorching hot, 1GiB/s colocated object storage, but Wasabi is our bread and butter object storage now.

discuss

order

Ensorceled|16 days ago

> > Working for free is not fun. Having a paid offering with a free community version is not fun. Ultimately, dealing with people who don't pay for your product is not fun.

> Completely different situations. None of the MinIO team worked for free. MinIO is a COSS company (commercial open source software).

MinIO is dealing with two out of the three issues, and the company is partially providing work for free, how is that "completely different"?

mbreese|16 days ago

The MinIO business model was a freemium model (well, Open Source + commercial support, which is slightly different). They used the free OSS version to drive demand for the commercially licensed version. It’s not like they had a free community version with users they needed to support thrust upon them — this was their plan. They weren’t volunteers.

You could argue that they got to the point where the benefit wasn’t worth the cost, but this was their business model. They would not have gotten to the point where the could have a commercial-only operation without the adoption and demand generated from the OSS version.

Running a successful OSS project is often a thankless job. Thanks for doing it. But this isn’t that.

throwaway894345|16 days ago

“I don’t want to support free users” is completely different than “we’re going all-in on AI, so we’re killing our previous product for both open source and commercial users and replacing it with a new one”

hobofan|16 days ago

I can also highly recommend SeaweedFS for development purposes, where you want to test general behaviour when using S3-compatible storage. That's what I mainly used MinIO before, and SeaweedFS, especially with their new `weed mini` command that runs all the services together in one process is a great replacement for local development and CI purposes.

dizhn|16 days ago

I've been using rustfs for some very light local development and it looks.. fine: )

codegladiator|16 days ago

can vouch for SeaweedFS, been using it since the time it was called weedfs and my managers were like are you sure you really want to use that ?

inumedia|12 days ago

Not seeing any one else comment about it, but I would caution against relying on Wasabi primarily. They actively and silently corrupted a lot of my data and still billed me for it. You'll just start seeing random 500s when trying to get data down from your bucket and it's just gone, no recovery, but it still counts as stored data so you're still paying for it.

phoronixrly|16 days ago

Nothing wrong? Does minio grant the basic freedoms of being able to run the software, study it, change it, and distribute it?

Did minio create the impression to its contributors that it will continue being FLOSS?

ufocia|16 days ago

Yes the software is under AGPL. Go forth and forkify.

The choice of AGPL tells you that they wanted to be the only commercial source of the software from the beginning.

sshine|16 days ago

Wasabi looks like a service.

Any recommendation for an in-cluster alternative in production?

Is that SeaweedFS?

jodrellblank|16 days ago

I’ve never heard of SeaweedFS, but Ceph cluster storage system has an S3-compatible layer (Object Gateway).

It’s used by CERN to make Petabyte-scale storage capable of ingesting data from particle collider experiments and they're now up to 17 clusters and 74PB which speaks to its production stability. Apparently people use it down to 3-host Proxmox virtualisation clusters, in a similar place as VMware VSAN.

Ceph has been pretty good to us for ~1PB scalable backup storage for many years, except that it’s a non-trivial system administration effort and needs good hardware and networking investment, and my employer wasn't fully backing that commitment. (We’re moving off it to Wasabi for S3 storage). It also leans more towards data integrity than performance, it's great at being massively-parallel and not so rapid at being single thread high-IOPs.

https://ceph.io/en/users/documentation/

https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/

https://indico.cern.ch/event/1337241/contributions/5629430/a...