You have it the wrong way around. Here, ZFS uses many small S3 objects as the storage substrate, rather than physical disks. The value proposition is that this should be definitely cheaper and perhaps more durable than EBS.
Yes that is the value prop. Cheap S3 instead of expensive EBS.
EBS limitations:
- Per-instance throughput caps
- Pay for full provisioned capacity whether filled or not
S3:
- Pay only for what you store
- No per-instance bandwidth limits as long as you have network optimized instance
One use case that comes to mind is backups. I can have a zpool created backed by a S3 vdev and then use zfs send | zfs recv to backup datasets to S3 ( or the billion other S3 like providers)
Saves me the step of creating an instance with EBS volumes and snapshotting those to S3 or whatever
haven't done the math at all on whether that's cost effective, but that's the usecase that comes to mind immediately
I hope you are not having that massive storage storage on public-cloud then you would need MayaNAS to reduce storage costs.
For S3 as frontend use MinIO gateway - serves S3 API from your ZFS filesystem
You have it the wrong way around. Here, ZFS uses many small S3 objects as the storage substrate, rather than physical disks. The value proposition is that this should be definitely cheaper and perhaps more durable than EBS.
See s3backer, a FUSE implementation of similar: https://github.com/archiecobbs/s3backer
See prior in kernel ZFS work by Delphix which AFAIK was closed by Delphix management: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opW9KhjOQ3Q
BTW this appears to be closed too!