watchman VS juicefs

postCreateCommand This section permit to execute a command after the build of the container. I've used this command to execute a script to install Expo and other dependencies like watchman

Facebook open source product: https://github.com/facebook/watchman to get notified when configuration, file or other change

Facebook Meta's Watchman Service looks very useful for watching for changes in files and directories to kick off automation. Still, there seem to be a bunch of gotchas with it that only come to light after trying to mess with it. The docs seem lacking, the Python library needs to be updated, and even the installation on non-Ubuntu or Red Hat distros requires a rebuild, which has been somewhat problematic given the build tools. Also, no official Docker container.

Not to be confused with Facebook’s file watch daemon, which does the same sort of thing but is more complicated. There’s a bunch of tools that integrate Facebook’s watchman for more efficient change tracking.

https://facebook.github.io/watchman/

Support for Kerberos keytab files

JuiceFS under the Apache License 2.0, is a high-performance POSIX file system optimized for cloud-native environments. It stores data in Object Storage (e.g., Amazon S3) and metadata in databases like Redis, MySQL, or TiKV. JuiceFS integrates massive cloud storage with big data, machine learning, and AI applications efficiently, akin to local storage. It features full POSIX and Hadoop compatibility, S3 interface, Kubernetes support, and shared file storage for numerous clients. Some cool features are - strong consistency, scalable performance, data encryption, global file locks, and compression with LZ4 or Zstandard.

To improve the handling process of capacity overrun, the JuiceFS client supports deletion operations in the case of Ceph cluster fullness (see related code changes in JuiceFS Community Edition). Therefore, for newer client versions, there is no need to use set-full-ratio for temporary adjustments.

If you have any questions or would like to learn more, feel free to join discussions about JuiceFS on GitHub and the JuiceFS community on Slack.

The architecture image shows GCS and others, so I suspect it does.

https://github.com/juicedata/juicefs#architecture

See also: JuiceFS: https://juicefs.com/

Adds a DBMS or key-value store for metadata, making the filesystem much faster (POSIX, small overwrites don't have to replace a full object in the GCS/S3 backend).

Almost certainly a better solution if you want to turn your object storage into a mountable filesystem, with the (big) caveat that you can't access the files directly in the bucket (they are not stored transparently).

JuiceFS can do the same thing as s3fs-fuse, but better. Because it supports robust data consistency and caching policies to improve performance.