JuiceFS
No written verdict yet. Here is what commenters said.
Why people recommend it
“I use JuiceFS https://github.com/juicedata/juicefs if you think the Chinese are worth the trust”
“We use it for our sandboxes at Celesto to enable a durable S3-backed file system.”
Show 3 more
“it's cool tech.”
“Sounds ideal for your kind of situation where a filesystem is being abused as a database”
“We've been using JuiceFS in production for a few months now and I'm a big fan.”
Caveats and dissent
“benchmarked with JuiceFS using torrents and was catastrophic”
“juiceFS performance totalling collapsing under very small files/operations”
Show 1 more
“i just assumed JuiceFS was a very bad fit for archives shared through Bittorrent”
Often compared with
Who recommends it in their own words
From the makers not counted in the ranking
“support more 10 options, include redis”
“JuiceFS can be scaled to hundreds of PB by design, also is verified by thousands of users in production”
Threads where it came up
- JuiceFS is a distributed POSIX file system built on top of Redis and S3 13 mentions
- Alternatives to MinIO for single-node local S3 1 mention
- item 49461804 1 mention
- ZeroFS vs. Amazon S3 Files 1 mention
- Show HN: ZeroFS – A log-structured filesystem for S3 1 mention
- Show HN: A durable filesystem layer for AI agents 1 mention
Data: juicefs.json. Quotes are verbatim; the verdict and theme labels are written by a model from these comments, and every clause links to its sources.
All comments 18
“I use JuiceFS https://github.com/juicedata/juicefs if you think the Chinese are worth the trust”
“We use it for our sandboxes at Celesto to enable a durable S3-backed file system.”
“benchmarked with JuiceFS using torrents and was catastrophic”
“The HA certainly makes this more of an alternative to JuiceFS now.”
“we use juicefs which separates the actual data and metadata”
“it's cool tech.”
“Sounds ideal for your kind of situation where a filesystem is being abused as a database”
“We've been using JuiceFS in production for a few months now and I'm a big fan.”
“pjdtest result of JuiceFS”
“The MLPerf performance of JuiceFS last year”
We developed Object Mount (formerly cunoFS) (https://www.storj.io/object-mount?hn=1) specifically to not rely on any metadata storage other than S3 AND preserve 1:1 mapping of objects to files AND support for POSIX. We have a direct mode that uses LD_PRELOAD to keep everything in userspace so no FUSE overhead. This approach isn't right for every use case and juice might be a better fit for this sort of 'direct block
“juiceFS performance totalling collapsing under very small files/operations”
“i just assumed JuiceFS was a very bad fit for archives shared through Bittorrent”
“those really helped de-abstractify what JuiceFS is for”
“It backs its metadata up to S3.”
I'm betting this is on the front page today (as opposed to any other day; Juice is very neat and doesn't need us to hype it) because of our Sprites post, which goes into some detail about how we use Juice (for the time being; I'm not sure if we'll keep it this way). The TL;DR relevant to your comment is: we tore out a lot of the metadata stuff, and our metadata storage is SQLite + Litestream.io, which gives us fast l
“outperforms JuiceFS”
“Seems like they are using JuiceFS under the hood”