HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
openstack
swift
Python2011–2021
openstack / swift

swift

OpenStack Storage (Swift). Mirror of code maintained at opendev.org.

Explore on GitHubRead Hacker News discussions
5Distinct people
7Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
2.8KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

OpenStack Storage (Swift). Mirror of code maintained at opendev.org.

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 7:56:55 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year7 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2011-11-08 12:26:19 UTC to 2021-04-26 19:02:43 UTC.

0122011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments20112012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 1 submissions, 0 comments2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20162017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20112011-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20122012-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20132013-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20142014-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC110
20152015-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20162016-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20172017-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

1 sources
neverartful·Apr 26, 2021
I'm way late to the conversation. There are a few things that I haven't seen mentioned (apologies if I overlooked them). I have no idea how you evaluate the necessity of keeping the data safe, and that plays a huge factor in deciding what's appropriate. Amazon S3 makes it a no-brainer for having your data safe across failure domains. Of course, the same can be done with non-S3 solutions, but someone has to set it all up, test it, and pay for it. My background in storage is mostly related to working with Ceph and Swift (both OpenStack Swift and SwiftStack) while being employed by various hardware vendors. Some thoughts on Ceph: - In my opinion, Ceph is better suited for block storage than object storage. To be fair, it does support object storage with use of the Rados Gateway (RGW) and RGW does support the S3 API. However, Ceph has a stron
Read the rest
g consistency model and in my opinion, strong consistency tends to be better suited to block storage. Why is this? For a 10PB cluster (or larger), failures of various types will be the norm (mostly disk failures). What does Ceph do when a disk fails? It goes to work right away to move whatever data was on the failed disk (using its redundant copies/fragments) to a new place. No big deal if it's only a single HDD that's in failed status at any given point of time. What if you have a server, disk controller, or drive shelf fail? You get a whole bunch of data backfilling going on all at once. The other consideration with strong consistency model is having multi-site storage. Not so good for strong consistency model (due to higher latency for inter-site communication). - Ceph has a ton of knobs, is very feature rich, and high on complexity (although it has improved). The open-source mechanisms for installing and the admin tools have experienced (and continue to have) a high-rate of churn. Do a quick search on how to install/deploy Ceph and you'll see multiple. Same with admin tools. Should you strongly consider Ceph as an option, I would strongly advise you to license and use one of the 3rd party software suites that (a) take the pain away from install/deploy/admin, and (b) reduce the amount of deep expertise that you would need to keep it running successfully. Examples of these 3rd party Ceph admin suites are Croit [0] and OSNEXUS [1]. Alternatively, if you like the idea of a Ceph appliance, I would take a close look at SoftIron [2]. Aside from Ceph, it's worth taking a very close look at OpenStack Swift [3][4]. It's only object storage and has been around for about 10 years. It supports the S3 protocol and also has its own Swift protocol. It's open source and it has an eventually consistent data model. Eventually consistent is (IMO) a much better fit for a 10+PB cluster of objects. Why is this? Because failures can be handled with less urgency and at more opportune times. Additionally, an eventually consistent model makes multi-site storage MUCH easier to deal with. I suggest going further and spending some quality time with the folks at SwiftStack [5]. Object storage is their game and they're very good at it. They can also help with on-prem vs hosted vs hybrid deployments. Additionally, you would definitely want to use erasure coding (EC) as opposed to full replication. This is easy enough to do with either Swift or Ceph. Disclaimers and disclosures - I am not currently (nor have ever been) employed by any of the companies I mentioned above. Dell EMC Technical Lead and co-author of these documents: Dell EMC Ready Architecture for Red Hat Ceph Storage 3.2 - Object Storage Architecture [6] Dell EMC Ready Architecture for SwiftStack Storage - Object Storage Architecture Guide [7] Intel co-author of this document: "Accelerating Swift with Intel Cache Acceleration Software" [8] [0] https://croit.io [1] https://www.osnexus.com/technology/ceph [2] https://softiron.com [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Swift [4] https://github.com/openstack/swift [5] https://www.swiftstack.com [6] https://www.delltechnologies.com/resources/en-us/asset/technical-guides-support-in… [7] https://infohub.delltechnologies.com/section-assets/solution-brief-swiftstack-1 [8] https://www.intel.sg/content/www/xa/en/software/intel-cache-acceleration-software-…
In Ask HN: How would you store 10PB of data for your startup today?

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.