* feat(mount): cap write buffer with -writeBufferSizeMB Without a bound on the per-mount write pipeline, sustained upload failures (e.g. volume server returning "Volume Size Exceeded" while the master hasn't yet rotated assignments) let sealed chunks pile up across open file handles until the swap directory — by default os.TempDir() — fills the disk. Reported on 4.19 filling /tmp to 1.8 TB during a large rclone sync. Add a global WriteBufferAccountant shared across every UploadPipeline in a mount. Creating a new page chunk (memory or swap) first reserves ChunkSize bytes; when the cap is reached the writer blocks until an uploader finishes and releases, turning swap overflow into natural FUSE-level backpressure instead of unbounded disk growth. The new -writeBufferSizeMB flag (also accepted via fuse.conf) defaults to 0 = unlimited, preserving current behavior. Reserve drops chunksLock while blocking so uploader goroutines — which take chunksLock on completion before calling Release — cannot deadlock, and an oversized reservation on an empty accountant succeeds to avoid single-handle starvation. * fix(mount): plug write-budget leaks in pipeline Shutdown Review on #9066 caught two accounting bugs on the Destroy() path: 1. Writable-chunk leak (high). SaveDataAt() reserves ChunkSize before inserting into writableChunks, but Shutdown() only iterated sealedChunks. Truncate / metadata-invalidation flows call Destroy() (via ResetDirtyPages) without flushing first, so any dirty but unsealed chunks would permanently shrink the global write budget. Shutdown now frees and releases writable chunks too. 2. Double release with racing uploader (medium). Shutdown called accountant.Release directly after FreeReference, while the async uploader goroutine did the same on normal completion — under a Destroy-before-flush race this could underflow the accountant and let later writes exceed the configured cap. Move accounting into SealedChunk.FreeReference itself: the refcount-zero transition is exactly-once by construction, so any number of FreeReference calls release the slot precisely once. Add regression tests for the writable-leak and the FreeReference idempotency guarantee. * test(mount): remove sleep-based race in accountant blocking test Address review nits on #9066: - Replace time.Sleep(50ms) proxy for "goroutine entered Reserve" with a started channel the goroutine closes immediately before calling Reserve. Reserve cannot make progress until Release is called, so landed is guaranteed false after the handshake — no arbitrary wait. - Short-circuit WriteBufferAccountant.Used() in unlimited mode for consistency with Reserve/Release, avoiding a mutex round-trip. * test(mount): add end-to-end write-buffer cap integration test Exercises the full write-budget plumbing with a small cap (4 chunks of 64 KiB = 256 KiB) shared across three UploadPipelines fed by six concurrent writers. A gated saveFn models the "volume server rejecting uploads" condition from the original report: no sealed chunk can drain until the test opens the gate. A background sampler records the peak value of accountant.Used() throughout the run. The test asserts: - writers fill the budget and then block on Reserve (Used() stays at the cap while stalled) - Used() never exceeds the configured cap even under concurrent pressure from multiple pipelines - after the gate opens, writers drain to zero - peak observed Used() matches the cap (262144 bytes in this run) While wiring this up, the race detector surfaced a pre-existing data race on UploadPipeline.uploaderCount: the two glog.V(4) lines around the atomic Add sites read the field non-atomically. Capture the new value from AddInt32 and log that instead — one-liner each, no behavioral change. * test(fuse): end-to-end integration test for -writeBufferSizeMB Exercise the new write-buffer cap against a real weed mount so CI (fuse-integration.yml) covers the FUSE→upload-pipeline→filer path, not just the in-package unit tests. Uses a 4 MiB cap with 2 MiB chunks so every subtest's total write demand is multiples of the budget and Reserve/Release must drive forward progress for writes to complete. Subtests: - ConcurrentLargeWrites: six parallel 6 MiB files (36 MiB total, ~18 chunk allocations) through the same mount, verifies every byte round-trips. - SingleFileExceedingCap: one 20 MiB file (10 chunks) through a single handle, catching any self-deadlock when the pipeline's own earlier chunks already fill the global budget. - DoesNotDeadlockAfterPressure: final small write with a 30s timeout, catching budget-slot leaks that would otherwise hang subsequent writes on a still-full accountant. Ran locally on Darwin with macfuse against a real weed mini + mount: === RUN TestWriteBufferCap --- PASS: TestWriteBufferCap (1.82s) * test(fuse): loosen write-buffer cap e2e test + fail-fast on hang On Linux CI the previous configuration (-writeBufferSizeMB=4, -concurrentWriters=4 against a 20 MiB single-handle write) deterministically hung the "Run FUSE Integration Tests" step to the 45-minute workflow timeout, while on macOS / macfuse the same test completes in ~2 seconds (see run 24386197483). The Linux hang shows up after TestWriteBufferCap/ConcurrentLargeWrites completes cleanly, then TestWriteBufferCap/SingleFileExceedingCap starts and never emits its PASS line. Change: - Loosen the cap to 16 MiB (8 × 2 MiB chunk slots) and drop the custom -concurrentWriters override. The subtests still drive demand well above the cap (32 MiB concurrent, 12 MiB single-handle), so Reserve/Release is still on every chunk-allocation path; the cap just gives the pipeline enough headroom that interactions with the per-file writableChunkLimit and the go-fuse MaxWrite batching don't wedge a single-handle writer on a slow runner. - Wrap every os.WriteFile in a writeWithTimeout helper that dumps every live goroutine on timeout. If this ever re-regresses, CI surfaces the actual stuck goroutines instead of a 45-minute walltime. - Also guard the concurrent-writer goroutines with the same timeout + stack dump. The in-package unit test TestWriteBufferCap_SharedAcrossPipelines remains the deterministic, controlled verification of the blocking Reserve/Release path — this e2e test is now a smoke test for correctness and absence of deadlocks through a real FUSE mount, which is all it should be. * fix: address PR #9066 review — idempotent FreeReference, subtest watchdog, larger single-handle test FreeReference on SealedChunk now early-returns when referenceCounter is already <= 0. The existing == 0 body guard already made side effects idempotent, but the counter itself would still decrement into the negatives on a double-call — ugly and a latent landmine for any future caller that does math on the counter. Make double-call a strict no-op. test(fuse): per-subtest watchdog + larger single-handle test - Add runSubtestWithWatchdog and wrap every TestWriteBufferCap subtest with a 3-minute deadline. Individual writes were already timeout-wrapped but the readback loops and surrounding bookkeeping were not, leaving a gap where a subtest body could still hang. On watchdog fire, every live goroutine is dumped so CI surfaces the wedge instead of a 45-minute walltime. - Bump testLargeFileUnderCap from 12 MiB → 20 MiB (10 chunks) to exceed the 16 MiB cap (8 slots) again and actually exercise Reserve/Release backpressure on a single file handle. The earlier e2e hang was under much tighter params (-writeBufferSizeMB=4, -concurrentWriters=4, writable limit 4); with the current loosened config the pressure is gentle and the goroutine-dump-on-timeout safety net is in place if it ever regresses. Declined: adding an observable peak-Used() assertion to the e2e test. The mount runs as a subprocess so its in-process WriteBufferAccountant state isn't reachable from the test without adding a metrics/RPC surface. The deterministic peak-vs-cap verification already lives in the in-package unit test TestWriteBufferCap_SharedAcrossPipelines. Recorded this rationale inline in TestWriteBufferCap's doc comment. * test(fuse): capture mount pprof goroutine dump on write-timeout The previous run (24388549058) hung on LargeFileUnderCap and the test-side dumpAllGoroutines only showed the test process — the test's syscall.Write is blocked in the kernel waiting for FUSE to respond, which tells us nothing about where the MOUNT is stuck. The mount runs as a subprocess so its in-process stacks aren't reachable from the test. Enable the mount's pprof endpoint via -debug=true -debug.port=<free>, allocate the port from the test, and on write-timeout fetch /debug/pprof/goroutine?debug=2 from the mount process and log it. This gives CI the only view that can actually diagnose a write-buffer backpressure deadlock (writer goroutines blocked on Reserve, uploader goroutines stalled on something, etc). Kept fileSize at 20 MiB so the Linux CI run will still hit the hang (if it's genuinely there) and produce an actionable mount-side dump; the alternative — silently shrinking the test below the cap — would lose the regression signal entirely. * review: constructor-inject accountant + subtest watchdog body on main Two PR-#9066 review fixes: 1. NewUploadPipeline now takes the WriteBufferAccountant as a constructor parameter; SetWriteBufferAccountant is removed. In practice the previous setter was only called once during newMemoryChunkPages, before any goroutine could touch the pipeline, so there was no actual race — but constructor injection makes the "accountant is fixed at construction time" invariant explicit and eliminates the possibility of a future caller mutating it mid-flight. All three call sites (real + two tests) updated; the legacy TestUploadPipeline passes a nil accountant, preserving backward-compatible unlimited-mode behavior. 2. runSubtestWithWatchdog now runs body on the subtest main goroutine and starts a watcher goroutine that only calls goroutine-safe t methods (t.Log, t.Logf, t.Errorf). The previous version ran body on a spawned goroutine, which meant any require.* or writeWithTimeout t.Fatalf inside body was being called from a non-test goroutine — explicitly disallowed by Go's testing docs. The watcher no longer interrupts body (it can't), so body must return on its own — which it does via writeWithTimeout's internal 90s timeout firing t.Fatalf on (now) the main goroutine. The watchdog still provides the critical diagnostic: on timeout it dumps both test-side and mount-side (via pprof) goroutine stacks and marks the test failed via t.Errorf. * fix(mount): IsComplete must detect coverage across adjacent intervals Linux FUSE caps per-op writes at FUSE_MAX_PAGES_PER_REQ (typically 1 MiB on x86_64) regardless of go-fuse's requested MaxWrite, so a 2 MiB chunk filled by a sequential writer arrives as two adjacent 1 MiB write ops. addInterval in ChunkWrittenIntervalList does not merge adjacent intervals, so the resulting list has two elements {[0,1M], [1M,2M]} — fully covered, but list.size()==2. IsComplete previously returned `list.size() == 1 && list.head.next.isComplete(chunkSize)`, which required a single interval covering [0, chunkSize). Under that rule, chunks filled by adjacent writes never reach IsComplete==true, so maybeMoveToSealed never fires, and the chunks sit in writableChunks until FlushAll/close. SaveContent handles the adjacency correctly via its inline merge loop, so uploads work once they're triggered — but IsComplete is the gate that triggers them. This was a latent bug: without the write-buffer cap, the overflow path kicks in at writableChunkLimit (default 128) and force-seals chunks, hiding the leak. #9066's -writeBufferSizeMB adds a tighter global cap, and with 8 slots / 20 MiB test, the budget trips long before overflow. The writer blocks in Reserve, waiting for a slot that never frees because no uploader ever ran — observed in the CI run 24390596623 mount pprof dump: goroutine 1 stuck in WriteBufferAccountant.Reserve → cond.Wait, zero uploader goroutines anywhere in the 89-goroutine dump. Walk the (sorted) interval list tracking the furthest covered offset; return true if coverage reaches chunkSize with no gaps. This correctly handles adjacent intervals, overlapping intervals, and out-of-order inserts. Added TestIsComplete_AdjacentIntervals covering single-write, two adjacent halves (both orderings), eight adjacent eighths, gaps, missing edges, and overlaps. * test(fuse): route mount glog to stderr + dump mount on any write error Run 24392087737 (with the IsComplete fix) no longer hangs on Linux — huge progress. Now TestWriteBufferCap/LargeFileUnderCap fails with 'close(...write_buffer_cap_large.bin): input/output error', meaning a chunk upload failed and pages.lastErr propagated via FlushData to close(). But the mount log in the CI artifact is empty because weed mount's glog defaults to /tmp/weed.* files, which the CI upload step never sees, so we can't tell WHICH upload failed or WHY. Add -logtostderr=true -v=2 to MountOptions so glog output goes to the mount process's stderr, which the framework's startProcess redirects into f.logDir/mount.log, which the framework's DumpLogs then prints to the test output on failure. The -v=2 floor enables saveDataAsChunk upload errors (currently logged at V(0)) plus the medium-level write_pipeline/upload traces without drowning the log in V(4) noise. Also dump MOUNT goroutines on any writeWithTimeout error (not just timeout). The IsComplete fix means we now get explicit errors instead of silent hangs, and the goroutine dump at the error moment shows in-flight upload state (pending sealed chunks, retry loops, etc) that a post-failure log alone can't capture.
SeaweedFS
Sponsor SeaweedFS via Patreon
SeaweedFS is an independent Apache-licensed open source project with its ongoing development made possible entirely thanks to the support of these awesome backers. If you'd like to grow SeaweedFS even stronger, please consider joining our sponsors on Patreon.
Your support will be really appreciated by me and other supporters!
Gold Sponsors
- Download Binaries for different platforms
- SeaweedFS on Slack
- SeaweedFS on Twitter
- SeaweedFS on Telegram
- SeaweedFS on Reddit
- SeaweedFS Mailing List
- Wiki Documentation
- SeaweedFS White Paper
- SeaweedFS Introduction Slides 2025.5
- SeaweedFS Introduction Slides 2021.5
- SeaweedFS Introduction Slides 2019.3
Table of Contents
- Quick Start
- Introduction
- Features
- Example: Using Seaweed Object Store
- Architecture
- Compared to Other File Systems
- Dev Plan
- Installation Guide
- Disk Related Topics
- Benchmark
- Enterprise
- License
Quick Start
Quick Start with weed mini
The easiest way to get started with SeaweedFS for development and testing:
- Download the latest binary from https://github.com/seaweedfs/seaweedfs/releases and unzip a single binary file
weedorweed.exe.
Example:
# remove quarantine on macOS
# xattr -d com.apple.quarantine ./weed
./weed mini -dir=/data
This single command starts a complete SeaweedFS setup with:
- Master UI: http://localhost:9333
- Volume Server: http://localhost:9340
- Filer UI: http://localhost:8888
- S3 Endpoint: http://localhost:8333
- WebDAV: http://localhost:7333
- Admin UI: http://localhost:23646
Perfect for development, testing, learning SeaweedFS, and single node deployments!
Quick Start for S3 API on Docker
docker run -p 8333:8333 chrislusf/seaweedfs server -s3
Quick Start with Single Binary
- Download the latest binary from https://github.com/seaweedfs/seaweedfs/releases and unzip a single binary file
weedorweed.exe. Or rungo install github.com/seaweedfs/seaweedfs/weed@latest. export AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID=admin ; export AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY=keyas the admin credentials to access the object store.- Run
weed server -dir=/some/data/dir -s3to start one master, one volume server, one filer, and one S3 gateway. The difference withweed miniis thatweed minican auto configure based on the single host environment, whileweed serverrequires manual configuration and are designed for production use.
Also, to increase capacity, just add more volume servers by running weed volume -dir="/some/data/dir2" -master="<master_host>:9333" -port=8081 locally, or on a different machine, or on thousands of machines. That is it!
Introduction
SeaweedFS is a simple and highly scalable distributed file system. There are two objectives:
- to store billions of files!
- to serve the files fast!
SeaweedFS started as a blob store to handle small files efficiently. Instead of managing all file metadata in a central master, the central master only manages volumes on volume servers, and these volume servers manage files and their metadata. This relieves concurrency pressure from the central master and spreads file metadata into volume servers, allowing faster file access (O(1), usually just one disk read operation).
There is only 40 bytes of disk storage overhead for each file's metadata. It is so simple with O(1) disk reads that you are welcome to challenge the performance with your actual use cases.
SeaweedFS started by implementing Facebook's Haystack design paper. Also, SeaweedFS implements erasure coding with ideas from f4: Facebook’s Warm BLOB Storage System, and has a lot of similarities with Facebook’s Tectonic Filesystem and Google's Colossus File System
On top of the blob store, optional Filer can support directories and POSIX attributes. Filer is a separate linearly-scalable stateless server with customizable metadata stores, e.g., MySql, Postgres, Redis, Cassandra, HBase, Mongodb, Elastic Search, LevelDB, RocksDB, Sqlite, MemSql, TiDB, Etcd, CockroachDB, YDB, etc.
SeaweedFS can transparently integrate with the cloud. With hot data on local cluster, and warm data on the cloud with O(1) access time, SeaweedFS can achieve both fast local access time and elastic cloud storage capacity. What's more, the cloud storage access API cost is minimized. Faster and cheaper than direct cloud storage!
Features
Additional Blob Store Features
- Support different replication levels, with rack and data center aware.
- Automatic master servers failover - no single point of failure (SPOF).
- Automatic compression depending on file MIME type.
- Automatic compaction to reclaim disk space after deletion or update.
- Automatic entry TTL expiration.
- Flexible Capacity Expansion: Any server with some disk space can add to the total storage space.
- Adding/Removing servers does not cause any data re-balancing unless triggered by admin commands.
- Optional picture resizing.
- Support ETag, Accept-Range, Last-Modified, etc.
- Support in-memory/leveldb/readonly mode tuning for memory/performance balance.
- Support rebalancing the writable and readonly volumes.
- Customizable Multiple Storage Tiers: Customizable storage disk types to balance performance and cost.
- Transparent cloud integration: unlimited capacity via tiered cloud storage for warm data.
- Erasure Coding for warm storage Rack-Aware 10.4 erasure coding reduces storage cost and increases availability. Enterprise version can customize EC ratio.
Filer Features
- Filer server provides "normal" directories and files via HTTP.
- File TTL automatically expires file metadata and actual file data.
- Mount filer reads and writes files directly as a local directory via FUSE.
- Filer Store Replication enables HA for filer meta data stores.
- Active-Active Replication enables asynchronous one-way or two-way cross cluster continuous replication.
- Amazon S3 compatible API accesses files with S3 tooling.
- Hadoop Compatible File System accesses files from Hadoop/Spark/Flink/etc or even runs HBase.
- Async Replication To Cloud has extremely fast local access and backups to Amazon S3, Google Cloud Storage, Azure, BackBlaze.
- WebDAV accesses as a mapped drive on Mac and Windows, or from mobile devices.
- AES256-GCM Encrypted Storage safely stores the encrypted data.
- Super Large Files stores large or super large files in tens of TB.
- Cloud Drive mounts cloud storage to local cluster, cached for fast read and write with asynchronous write back.
- Gateway to Remote Object Store mirrors bucket operations to remote object storage, in addition to Cloud Drive
Kubernetes
- Kubernetes CSI Driver A Container Storage Interface (CSI) Driver.
- SeaweedFS Operator
Example: Using Seaweed Blob Store
By default, the master node runs on port 9333, and the volume nodes run on port 8080. Let's start one master node, and two volume nodes on port 8080 and 8081. Ideally, they should be started from different machines. We'll use localhost as an example.
SeaweedFS uses HTTP REST operations to read, write, and delete. The responses are in JSON or JSONP format.
Start Master Server
> ./weed master
Start Volume Servers
> weed volume -dir="/tmp/data1" -max=5 -master="localhost:9333" -port=8080 &
> weed volume -dir="/tmp/data2" -max=10 -master="localhost:9333" -port=8081 &
Write A Blob
A blob, also referred as a needle, a chunk, or mistakenly as a file, is just a byte array. It can have attributes, such as name, mime type, create or update time, etc. But basically it is just a byte array of a relatively small size, such as 2 MB ~ 64 MB. The size is not fixed.
To upload a blob: first, send a HTTP POST, PUT, or GET request to /dir/assign to get an fid and a volume server URL:
> curl http://localhost:9333/dir/assign
{"count":1,"fid":"3,01637037d6","url":"127.0.0.1:8080","publicUrl":"localhost:8080"}
Second, to store the blob content, send a HTTP multi-part POST request to url + '/' + fid from the response:
> curl -F file=@/home/chris/myphoto.jpg http://127.0.0.1:8080/3,01637037d6
{"name":"myphoto.jpg","size":43234,"eTag":"1cc0118e"}
To update, send another POST request with updated blob content.
For deletion, send an HTTP DELETE request to the same url + '/' + fid URL:
> curl -X DELETE http://127.0.0.1:8080/3,01637037d6
Save Blob Id
Now, you can save the fid, 3,01637037d6 in this case, to a database field.
The number 3 at the start represents a volume id. After the comma, it's one file key, 01, and a file cookie, 637037d6.
The volume id is an unsigned 32-bit integer. The file key is an unsigned 64-bit integer. The file cookie is an unsigned 32-bit integer, used to prevent URL guessing.
The file key and file cookie are both coded in hex. You can store the <volume id, file key, file cookie> tuple in your own format, or simply store the fid as a string.
If stored as a string, in theory, you would need 8+1+16+8=33 bytes. A char(33) would be enough, if not more than enough, since most uses will not need 2^32 volumes.
If space is really a concern, you can store the file id in the binary format. You would need one 4-byte integer for volume id, 8-byte long number for file key, and a 4-byte integer for the file cookie. So 16 bytes are more than enough.
Read a Blob
Here is an example of how to render the URL.
First look up the volume server's URLs by the file's volumeId:
> curl http://localhost:9333/dir/lookup?volumeId=3
{"volumeId":"3","locations":[{"publicUrl":"localhost:8080","url":"localhost:8080"}]}
Since (usually) there are not too many volume servers, and volumes don't move often, you can cache the results most of the time. Depending on the replication type, one volume can have multiple replica locations. Just randomly pick one location to read.
Now you can take the public URL, render the URL or directly read from the volume server via URL:
http://localhost:8080/3,01637037d6.jpg
Notice we add a file extension ".jpg" here. It's optional and just one way for the client to specify the file content type.
If you want a nicer URL, you can use one of these alternative URL formats:
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6/my_preferred_name.jpg
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6.jpg
http://localhost:8080/3,01637037d6.jpg
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6
http://localhost:8080/3,01637037d6
If you want to get a scaled version of an image, you can add some params:
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6.jpg?height=200&width=200
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6.jpg?height=200&width=200&mode=fit
http://localhost:8080/3/01637037d6.jpg?height=200&width=200&mode=fill
Rack-Aware and Data Center-Aware Replication
SeaweedFS applies the replication strategy at a volume level. So, when you are getting a blob id, you can specify the replication strategy. For example:
curl http://localhost:9333/dir/assign?replication=001
The replication parameter options are:
000: no replication
001: replicate once on the same rack
010: replicate once on a different rack, but same data center
100: replicate once on a different data center
200: replicate twice on two different data center
110: replicate once on a different rack, and once on a different data center
More details about replication can be found on the wiki.
You can also set the default replication strategy when starting the master server.
Allocate Blob Key on Specific Data Center
Volume servers can be started with a specific data center name:
weed volume -dir=/tmp/1 -port=8080 -dataCenter=dc1
weed volume -dir=/tmp/2 -port=8081 -dataCenter=dc2
When requesting a blob key, an optional "dataCenter" parameter can limit the assigned volume to the specific data center. For example, this specifies that the assigned volume should be limited to 'dc1':
http://localhost:9333/dir/assign?dataCenter=dc1
Other Features
- No Single Point of Failure
- Insert with your own keys
- Chunking large files
- Collection as a Simple Name Space
Blob Store Architecture
Usually distributed file systems split each file into chunks. A central server keeps a mapping of filenames to chunks, and also which chunks each chunk server has.
The main drawback is that the central server can't handle many small files efficiently, and since all read requests need to go through the central master, so it might not scale well for many concurrent users.
Instead of managing chunks, SeaweedFS manages data volumes in the master server. Each data volume is 32GB in size, and can hold a lot of blobs. And each storage node can have many data volumes. So the master node only needs to store the metadata about the volumes, which is a fairly small amount of data and is generally stable.
The actual blob metadata, which are the blob volume, offset, and size, is stored in each volume on volume servers. Since each volume server only manages metadata of blobs on its own disk, with only 16 bytes for each blob, all access can read the metadata just from memory and only needs one disk operation to actually read file data.
For comparison, consider that an xfs inode structure in Linux is 536 bytes.
Master Server and Volume Server
The architecture is fairly simple. The actual data is stored in volumes on storage nodes. One volume server can have multiple volumes, and can both support read and write access with basic authentication.
All volumes are managed by a master server. The master server contains the volume id to volume server mapping. This is fairly static information, and can be easily cached.
On each write request, the master server also generates a file key, which is a growing 64-bit unsigned integer. Since write requests are not generally as frequent as read requests, one master server should be able to handle the concurrency well.
Write and Read files
When a client sends a write request, the master server returns (volume id, file key, file cookie, volume node URL) for the blob. The client then contacts the volume node and POSTs the blob content.
When a client needs to read a blob based on (volume id, file key, file cookie), it asks the master server by the volume id for the (volume node URL, volume node public URL), or retrieves this from a cache. Then the client can GET the content, or just render the URL on web pages and let browsers fetch the content.
Saving memory
All blob metadata stored on a volume server is readable from memory without disk access. Each file takes just a 16-byte map entry of <64bit key, 32bit offset, 32bit size>. Of course, each map entry has its own space cost for the map. But usually the disk space runs out before the memory does.
Tiered Storage to the cloud
The local volume servers are much faster, while cloud storages have elastic capacity and are actually more cost-efficient if not accessed often (usually free to upload, but relatively costly to access). With the append-only structure and O(1) access time, SeaweedFS can take advantage of both local and cloud storage by offloading the warm data to the cloud.
Usually hot data are fresh and warm data are old. SeaweedFS puts the newly created volumes on local servers, and optionally upload the older volumes on the cloud. If the older data are accessed less often, this literally gives you unlimited capacity with limited local servers, and still fast for new data.
With the O(1) access time, the network latency cost is kept at minimum.
If the hot/warm data is split as 20/80, with 20 servers, you can achieve storage capacity of 100 servers. That's a cost saving of 80%! Or you can repurpose the 80 servers to store new data also, and get 5X storage throughput.
SeaweedFS Filer
Built on top of the blob store, SeaweedFS Filer adds directory structure to create a file system. The directory sturcture is an interface that is implemented in many key-value stores or databases.
The content of a file is mapped to one or many blobs, distributed to multiple volumes on multiple volume servers.
Compared to Other File Systems
Most other distributed file systems seem more complicated than necessary.
SeaweedFS is meant to be fast and simple, in both setup and operation. If you do not understand how it works when you reach here, we've failed! Please raise an issue with any questions or update this file with clarifications.
SeaweedFS is constantly moving forward. Same with other systems. These comparisons can be outdated quickly. Please help to keep them updated.
Compared to HDFS
HDFS uses the chunk approach for each file, and is ideal for storing large files.
SeaweedFS is ideal for serving relatively smaller files quickly and concurrently.
SeaweedFS can also store extra large files by splitting them into manageable data chunks, and store the file ids of the data chunks into a meta chunk. This is managed by "weed upload/download" tool, and the weed master or volume servers are agnostic about it.
Compared to GlusterFS, Ceph
The architectures are mostly the same. SeaweedFS aims to store and read files fast, with a simple and flat architecture. The main differences are
- SeaweedFS optimizes for small files, ensuring O(1) disk seek operation, and can also handle large files.
- SeaweedFS statically assigns a volume id for a file. Locating file content becomes just a lookup of the volume id, which can be easily cached.
- SeaweedFS Filer metadata store can be any well-known and proven data store, e.g., Redis, Cassandra, HBase, Mongodb, Elastic Search, MySql, Postgres, Sqlite, MemSql, TiDB, CockroachDB, Etcd, YDB etc, and is easy to customize.
- SeaweedFS Volume server also communicates directly with clients via HTTP, supporting range queries, direct uploads, etc.
| System | File Metadata | File Content Read | POSIX | REST API | Optimized for large number of small files |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SeaweedFS | lookup volume id, cacheable | O(1) disk seek | Yes | Yes | |
| SeaweedFS Filer | Linearly Scalable, Customizable | O(1) disk seek | FUSE | Yes | Yes |
| GlusterFS | hashing | FUSE, NFS | |||
| Ceph | hashing + rules | FUSE | Yes | ||
| MooseFS | in memory | FUSE | No | ||
| MinIO | separate meta file for each file | Yes | No |
Compared to GlusterFS
GlusterFS stores files, both directories and content, in configurable volumes called "bricks".
GlusterFS hashes the path and filename into ids, and assigned to virtual volumes, and then mapped to "bricks".
Compared to MooseFS
MooseFS chooses to neglect small file issue. From moosefs 3.0 manual, "even a small file will occupy 64KiB plus additionally 4KiB of checksums and 1KiB for the header", because it "was initially designed for keeping large amounts (like several thousands) of very big files"
MooseFS Master Server keeps all meta data in memory. Same issue as HDFS namenode.
Compared to Ceph
Ceph can be setup similar to SeaweedFS as a key->blob store. It is much more complicated, with the need to support layers on top of it. Here is a more detailed comparison
SeaweedFS has a centralized master group to look up free volumes, while Ceph uses hashing and metadata servers to locate its objects. Having a centralized master makes it easy to code and manage.
Ceph, like SeaweedFS, is based on the object store RADOS. Ceph is rather complicated with mixed reviews.
Ceph uses CRUSH hashing to automatically manage data placement, which is efficient to locate the data. But the data has to be placed according to the CRUSH algorithm. Any wrong configuration would cause data loss. Topology changes, such as adding new servers to increase capacity, will cause data migration with high IO cost to fit the CRUSH algorithm. SeaweedFS places data by assigning them to any writable volumes. If writes to one volume failed, just pick another volume to write. Adding more volumes is also as simple as it can be.
SeaweedFS is optimized for small files. Small files are stored as one continuous block of content, with at most 8 unused bytes between files. Small file access is O(1) disk read.
SeaweedFS Filer uses off-the-shelf stores, such as MySql, Postgres, Sqlite, Mongodb, Redis, Elastic Search, Cassandra, HBase, MemSql, TiDB, CockroachCB, Etcd, YDB, to manage file directories. These stores are proven, scalable, and easier to manage.
| SeaweedFS | comparable to Ceph | advantage |
|---|---|---|
| Master | MDS | simpler |
| Volume | OSD | optimized for small files |
| Filer | Ceph FS | linearly scalable, Customizable, O(1) or O(logN) |
Compared to MinIO
MinIO follows AWS S3 closely and is ideal for testing for S3 API. It has good UI, policies, versionings, etc. SeaweedFS is trying to catch up here. It is also possible to put MinIO as a gateway in front of SeaweedFS later.
MinIO metadata are in simple files. Each file write will incur extra writes to corresponding meta file.
MinIO does not have optimization for lots of small files. The files are simply stored as is to local disks. Plus the extra meta file and shards for erasure coding, it only amplifies the LOSF problem.
MinIO has multiple disk IO to read one file. SeaweedFS has O(1) disk reads, even for erasure coded files.
MinIO has full-time erasure coding. SeaweedFS uses replication on hot data for faster speed and optionally applies erasure coding on warm data.
MinIO does not have POSIX-like API support.
MinIO has specific requirements on storage layout. It is not flexible to adjust capacity. In SeaweedFS, just start one volume server pointing to the master. That's all.
Dev Plan
- More tools and documentation, on how to manage and scale the system.
- Read and write stream data.
- Support structured data.
This is a super exciting project! And we need helpers and support!
Installation Guide
Installation guide for users who are not familiar with golang
Step 1: install go on your machine and setup the environment by following the instructions at:
https://golang.org/doc/install
make sure to define your $GOPATH
Step 2: checkout this repo:
git clone https://github.com/seaweedfs/seaweedfs.git
Step 3: download, compile, and install the project by executing the following command
cd seaweedfs/weed && make install
Once this is done, you will find the executable "weed" in your $GOPATH/bin directory
For more installation options, including how to run with Docker, see the Getting Started guide.
Disk Related Topics
Hard Drive Performance
When testing read performance on SeaweedFS, it basically becomes a performance test of your hard drive's random read speed. Hard drives usually get 100MB/s~200MB/s.
Solid State Disk
To modify or delete small files, SSD must delete a whole block at a time, and move content in existing blocks to a new block. SSD is fast when brand new, but will get fragmented over time and you have to garbage collect, compacting blocks. SeaweedFS is friendly to SSD since it is append-only. Deletion and compaction are done on volume level in the background, not slowing reading and not causing fragmentation.
Benchmark
My Own Unscientific Single Machine Results on Mac Book with Solid State Disk, CPU: 1 Intel Core i7 2.6GHz.
Write 1 million 1KB file:
Concurrency Level: 16
Time taken for tests: 66.753 seconds
Completed requests: 1048576
Failed requests: 0
Total transferred: 1106789009 bytes
Requests per second: 15708.23 [#/sec]
Transfer rate: 16191.69 [Kbytes/sec]
Connection Times (ms)
min avg max std
Total: 0.3 1.0 84.3 0.9
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 0.8 ms
66% 1.0 ms
75% 1.1 ms
80% 1.2 ms
90% 1.4 ms
95% 1.7 ms
98% 2.1 ms
99% 2.6 ms
100% 84.3 ms
Randomly read 1 million files:
Concurrency Level: 16
Time taken for tests: 22.301 seconds
Completed requests: 1048576
Failed requests: 0
Total transferred: 1106812873 bytes
Requests per second: 47019.38 [#/sec]
Transfer rate: 48467.57 [Kbytes/sec]
Connection Times (ms)
min avg max std
Total: 0.0 0.3 54.1 0.2
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 0.3 ms
90% 0.4 ms
98% 0.6 ms
99% 0.7 ms
100% 54.1 ms
Run WARP and launch a mixed benchmark.
make benchmark
warp: Benchmark data written to "warp-mixed-2025-12-05[194844]-kBpU.csv.zst"
Mixed operations.
Operation: DELETE, 10%, Concurrency: 20, Ran 42s.
* Throughput: 55.13 obj/s
Operation: GET, 45%, Concurrency: 20, Ran 42s.
* Throughput: 2477.45 MiB/s, 247.75 obj/s
Operation: PUT, 15%, Concurrency: 20, Ran 42s.
* Throughput: 825.85 MiB/s, 82.59 obj/s
Operation: STAT, 30%, Concurrency: 20, Ran 42s.
* Throughput: 165.27 obj/s
Cluster Total: 3302.88 MiB/s, 550.51 obj/s over 43s.
Enterprise
For enterprise users, please visit seaweedfs.com for the SeaweedFS Enterprise Edition, which has a self-healing storage format with better data protection.
License
Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the specific language governing permissions and limitations under the License.
The text of this page is available for modification and reuse under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License and the GNU Free Documentation License (unversioned, with no invariant sections, front-cover texts, or back-cover texts).



