Is there are good alternative to IPFS?
from onlinepersona@programming.dev to programming@programming.dev on 03 May 09:33
https://programming.dev/post/29659745

A distributed, content-addressed filesystem across the internet, not just in a home LAN, than can be mounted (fuse or whatever else), doesn’t require storing data twice, has a reasonable API and acceptable documentation.

Does something like that exist?

#programming

threaded - newest

ag10n@lemmy.world on 03 May 11:40 next collapse

ethereum.org/en/developers/docs/storage/

Nothing wrong with ipfs, hence its popularity

9point6@lemmy.world on 03 May 11:59 next collapse

Why not just IPFS? Have I missed something?

refalo@programming.dev on 03 May 16:59 collapse

My experience with IPFS over the years has been abysmal, and I think people have said the protocol design cannot sustain any more growth, which is not even that big yet at all.

You also cannot realistically search for files reliably by its hash, because of how files are divided into smaller pieces, whereby the method of dividing can change between clients, making the hashes incomparable. BitTorrent v2 solves this to my understanding, but almost nobody uses it for some reason.

Often times you need to wait several minutes for IPFS to find a file, assuming it ever finds it, which sometimes fails even on two boxes next to each other.

Corbin@programming.dev on 03 May 13:35 collapse

across the Internet … doesn’t require storing data twice

A flavor of the CAP theorem applies here; if you want your data to be available even during network partitions (and those are going to happen on the Internet!) then it has to be duplicated somehow. For example, I still have a soft spot for Tahoe-LAFS, which allows users to control how much duplication will be used and typically is configured to have some redundancy. Typical cloud providers build redundancy into their storage products; for example, it’s known that Google’s Colossus storage system uses Reed-Solomon to trade space for durability.