Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
1–10 of 102 posts
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#2A simple, high-throughput file client for mounting an Amazon S3 bucket as a local file system.
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#3> This is an alpha release and not yet ready for production use. We're especially interested in early feedback on features, performance, and compatibility. Please send feedback by opening a GitHub issue. See Current status for more limitations.
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#4[deleted]
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#5How does this compare to rclone, performance wise?
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#6It would be interesting to see how this compares to other solutions in this space, such as s3fs (the FUSE driver, not the python package), goofys, and the rclone mount feature, among others. This certainly has less features (notably, mounts are read-only!).
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#7I want a better client for Google Cloud Storage, too, while we’re at it. The Python gcloud / gsutil stuff is mediocre on the best of days.
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#8How does this compare to goofys?
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#9Something similar that I've been using for a while now for an S3 filesystem: Cyberduck[0]
Re: Mountpoint – file client for S3 written in Rust, from AWS
#10After teaching customers for years that S3 shouldn't be mounted as a filesystem because of its whole object-or-nothing semantics, and even offering a paid solution named "storage gateway" to prevent issues between FS and S3 semantics, it's rather interesting they'd release a product like this.
Amazon should really just fix the underlying issue of semantics by providing a PatchObjectPart API call that overwrites a particular multipart upload chunk with a new chunk uploaded from the client. CopyObjectPart+CompleteMultipartUpload still requires the client to issue CopyObjectPart calls for the entire object.