Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by dmoy on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:04PM (#44893162)

Would be interested to see a comparison with other not-NFS things (Lustre, daos, etc).

User space filesystem is not the first thing that comes to my mind when trying to get faster performance than NFS

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by fh973 on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:10PM (#44893240)

At Quobyte (https://www.quobyte.com) we use FUSE for the client for parallel file system access.

You can get dozens of GB/s out of FUSE nowadays. This will even improve in the near future as FUSE is adding io_uring support for communication with the kernel (instead of a pipe).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by dmoy on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @05:29PM (#44894092)

Yea I don't doubt that FUSE can go past NFS

But, as sibling is pointing out, e.g. Amazon fsx Lustre throughput is like 1GB/s throughout per TB storage, so presumably hundreds of GB/s at scale.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by nickaggarwal on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:11PM (#44893255)

Yes there is AWS FSx with lustre in the blog..that might be worth checking out

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by agcat on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:04PM (#44893166)

This is a great idea

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by bayindirh on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:08PM (#44893207)

You could also try JuiceFS & Weka (if you can have access to a cluster).

A well configured and distributed Lustre will be very fast, BTW.

JuiceFS: https://juicefs.com/en/

Weka: https://www.weka.io/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Fuse is 95% cheaper and 10x faster than NFS by nickaggarwal on Wednesday August 13, 2025 @04:17PM (#44893322)

Will test out Weka, Thanks for sharing

[ Parent | on HN ]