Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

We have a project for which S3 is a perfect fit, but for some customers we need to run everything in house. Ideally, we'd run something such that little or none of the code needs to change; can anyone suggest such a system?

I'm particularly interested in stability experiences, as we have (slightly) more interest in stability than speed.

So far I've seen OpenStack's SWIFT, and Eucalyptus, and maybe Riak? as serious contenders here, but I've bene hard pressed to find user impressions in a production environment.

share|improve this question

closed as off topic by sysadmin1138 Nov 14 '12 at 2:41

Questions on Server Fault are expected to relate to server, networking, or related infrastructure administration within the scope defined by the community. Consider editing the question or leaving comments for improvement if you believe the question can be reworded to fit within the scope. Read more about reopening questions here.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

I'd refer you to this thread:… Gives other contenders.. – Marc Villemade Jul 18 '11 at 18:00
possible duplicate of S3-compatible Object Storage systems – Chris S Sep 29 '11 at 12:41
Product recommendations, even experience-requests, are off-topic per the FAQ. – sysadmin1138 Nov 14 '12 at 2:41

Check out CouchDB too. Its specifically built around documents, so its closer to S3 in that respect.

share|improve this answer

We use gridfs which is in mongodb. To store images when they are uploaded. Then they are shipped to s3.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.