Openstack Swift vs Rook

Overview

Openstack Swift

Stacks33

Followers91

Votes0

Rook

Stacks54

Followers103

Votes4

GitHub Stars13.2K

Forks2.8K

Openstack Swift vs Rook: What are the differences?

Architecture: Openstack Swift uses a centralized architecture where data is stored in a distributed cluster of servers. In contrast, Rook uses a decentralized architecture, leveraging the power of Kubernetes to deploy storage clusters across nodes in a Kubernetes cluster.
Protocol Support: Openstack Swift primarily supports the Swift API for object storage, while Rook provides support for various storage protocols including Ceph, NFS, iSCSI, and more. This allows Rook to be more versatile in supporting different storage needs.
Integration with Kubernetes: Rook is specifically designed to work seamlessly with Kubernetes, providing storage solutions that are tightly integrated with Kubernetes resources and workflows. On the other hand, Openstack Swift can be integrated with Kubernetes but may require additional configuration and setup.
Scalability and Flexibility: Rook offers more flexibility in terms of scalability, allowing users to easily scale storage resources up or down based on demand. Openstack Swift also provides scalability features but may require more manual intervention and configuration.
Community and Support: Openstack Swift benefits from the large OpenStack community, providing access to a wide range of resources, documentation, and community support. Rook, being a cloud-native project, has a community focus on Kubernetes and cloud-native technologies, offering specialized support in those areas.
Data Resilience: Openstack Swift offers built-in data replication and redundancy features to ensure data resilience. Rook, on the other hand, relies on underlying storage technologies like Ceph for data resilience, providing a more robust solution for data protection.

In Summary, Openstack Swift and Rook differ in architecture, protocol support, integration with Kubernetes, scalability, community and support, and data resilience, catering to different storage needs and use cases.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Openstack Swift	Rook
It is a highly available, distributed, eventually consistent object/blob store. Organizations can use Swift to store lots of data efficiently.	It is an open source cloud-native storage orchestrator for Kubernetes, providing the platform, framework, and support for a diverse set of storage solutions to natively integrate with cloud-native environments.
Distributed; consistent; Object/blob store	Simple and reliable automated resource management; Hyper-scale or hyper-converge your storage clusters; Efficiently distribute and replicate data to minimize loss; Provision, file, block, and object with multiple storage providers
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 13.2K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 2.8K
Stacks 33	Stacks 54
Followers 91	Followers 103
Votes 0	Votes 4
Pros & Cons
No community feedback yet	Pros 3 Minio Integration 1 Open Source Cons 2 Ceph is difficult 1 Slow
Integrations
No integrations available	Docker Kubernetes Cassandra CockroachDB

What are some alternatives to Openstack Swift, Rook?

Amazon S3

Amazon Simple Storage Service provides a fully redundant data storage infrastructure for storing and retrieving any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web

Amazon EBS

Amazon EBS volumes are network-attached, and persist independently from the life of an instance. Amazon EBS provides highly available, highly reliable, predictable storage volumes that can be attached to a running Amazon EC2 instance and exposed as a device within the instance. Amazon EBS is particularly suited for applications that require a database, file system, or access to raw block level storage.

Google Cloud Storage

Google Cloud Storage allows world-wide storing and retrieval of any amount of data and at any time. It provides a simple programming interface which enables developers to take advantage of Google's own reliable and fast networking infrastructure to perform data operations in a secure and cost effective manner. If expansion needs arise, developers can benefit from the scalability provided by Google's infrastructure.

Azure Storage

Azure Storage provides the flexibility to store and retrieve large amounts of unstructured data, such as documents and media files with Azure Blobs; structured nosql based data with Azure Tables; reliable messages with Azure Queues, and use SMB based Azure Files for migrating on-premises applications to the cloud.

Minio

Minio is an object storage server compatible with Amazon S3 and licensed under Apache 2.0 License

OpenEBS

OpenEBS allows you to treat your persistent workload containers, such as DBs on containers, just like other containers. OpenEBS itself is deployed as just another container on your host.

Rackspace Cloud Files

Cloud Files, powered by OpenStack®, provides an easy to use online storage for files and media which can be delivered globally at blazing speeds over Akamai's content delivery network (CDN).

Storj

It is an open source, decentralized file storage solution. It uses encryption, file sharing, and a blockchain-based hash table to store files on a peer-to-peer network. The goal is to make cloud file storage faster, cheaper, and private.

RunAbove

We give you full access to the OpenStack API, which our compute (Nova) and storage (Swift) solutions are based on. This means no provider lock-in and easy automation of all your deployments. You can also manage your account and billing details via our RESTful API. You can choose between Horizon or OVH's easy-to-use web panel.

DigitalOcean Spaces

DigitalOcean Spaces are designed to make it easy and cost effective to store and serve massive amounts of data. Spaces are ideal for storing static, unstructured data like audio, video, and images as well as large amounts of text.

Related Comparisons

Openstack Swift vs Rook: What are the differences?

Architecture: Openstack Swift uses a centralized architecture where data is stored in a distributed cluster of servers. In contrast, Rook uses a decentralized architecture, leveraging the power of Kubernetes to deploy storage clusters across nodes in a Kubernetes cluster.
Protocol Support: Openstack Swift primarily supports the Swift API for object storage, while Rook provides support for various storage protocols including Ceph, NFS, iSCSI, and more. This allows Rook to be more versatile in supporting different storage needs.
Integration with Kubernetes: Rook is specifically designed to work seamlessly with Kubernetes, providing storage solutions that are tightly integrated with Kubernetes resources and workflows. On the other hand, Openstack Swift can be integrated with Kubernetes but may require additional configuration and setup.
Scalability and Flexibility: Rook offers more flexibility in terms of scalability, allowing users to easily scale storage resources up or down based on demand. Openstack Swift also provides scalability features but may require more manual intervention and configuration.
Community and Support: Openstack Swift benefits from the large OpenStack community, providing access to a wide range of resources, documentation, and community support. Rook, being a cloud-native project, has a community focus on Kubernetes and cloud-native technologies, offering specialized support in those areas.
Data Resilience: Openstack Swift offers built-in data replication and redundancy features to ensure data resilience. Rook, on the other hand, relies on underlying storage technologies like Ceph for data resilience, providing a more robust solution for data protection.

Openstack Swift vs Rook

Overview