MinIO Alternatives in 2026: SeaweedFS, Garage, Ceph, Ozone, and More Compared

MinIO recently went fully commercial, leaving the open-source space. If you relied on MinIO as your self-hosted S3-compatible object store, you need a replacement. But picking one is not as simple as reading a feature matrix.

A technology radar from a large engineering organization recently shared their structured evaluation of MinIO replacements. They scored candidates across licensing, operations, quality, functionality, security, maturity, and deployment criteria. This post uses that evaluation alongside community feedback from engineers running these systems in production.

The Quick Comparison

Criteria	SeaweedFS	Garage	Weka+S3	Ozone	Storj
License	Apache 2.0	AGPL-3.0	Proprietary	Apache 2.0	AGPL-3.0
Language	Go	Rust	C++	Java	Go
Contributors	444	~79	Unknown	265	Unknown
Release cadence	Weekly	3 per year	3 per year + RCs	20+ per year	Frequent
Docker image	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Single-node mode	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
S3 API focus	Core + extras	Core S3	S3-compatible via gateway	S3, OFS, O3FS	S3 (via gateway)
Rolling updates	Yes	Yes	Unknown	No	Yes
Kafka integration	Yes	No	Unknown	Yes	No
Lifecycle policies	Yes	No	Unknown	Unknown	Unknown
Multi-site HA	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Known CVEs	No known	No known	Has known vulns	No known	More than 100
On market since	2011/2015 on GitHub	2020	Long-standing	2020	2020
IaC support	Yes (Ansible, K8s operator, Terraform)	Ansible community	Ansible	Yes	Ansible
Documentation quality	Good site with quick start, cookbook, reference, install guides, architecture docs	Has good site	Medium	No	No
Web UI	Example available	Community project	Research phase	Research phase	Research phase
Ease of deployment	Easy	Easy	Easy	Medium	Medium
Learning curve	Low	Low	Medium	Medium	Medium

Evaluation Criteria Explained

The technology radar uses a structured approach that any engineering organization can adopt:

Licensing and Economics:

• Does the license allow commercial use?
• What does it cost?
• Any geopolitical/sanctions risks? (relevant for teams relying on GitHub-hosted projects)

Operational Criteria:

• Active development (releases in the last 12 months, freshness of last release, Docker image updates)
• Number of contributors
• Profile of contributors (individuals, companies, Chinese tech firms, gaming companies, etc.)
• GitHub stars as a community signal

Quality Criteria:

• Test coverage with unit tests
• Documentation quality (quick start, cookbooks, reference guides, install docs)

Functional Criteria:

• Platform support (which Linux distros, architectures)
• Core focus (S3 API coverage, additional protocols)
• Multi-site HA
• Single-node mode
• Lifecycle policies
• Kafka integration

Security Criteria:

• Known CVEs
• Vulnerability management process (frequency of security patches)
• Fuzzing/penetration testing

Maturity:

• How long has the product been on the market in a stable state?

DevOps Compatibility:

• IaC support (Ansible, Terraform, Helm, K8s operator)
• Existing deployment guides and community roles

Risks:

• Is the product a main revenue source? (or could it pivot/abandon)
• Community health and bus factor
• Infrastructure requirements and key operational risks

Deep Dive: The Contenders

SeaweedFS: The Strongest Open-Source Alternative

SeaweedFS scores highest in the evaluation and for good reason.

Why it leads:

• Apache 2.0 license with zero commercial restrictions
• 444 contributors with weekly releases
• Good documentation (quick start, cookbook, reference, architecture)
• Handles billions of small files efficiently (inspired by Facebook's Haystack paper)
• Built-in FUSE mount, WebDAV, and S3 gateway
• IaC: K8s operator, Ansible role, Terraform provider
• Tiered storage (move cold data to cheaper backends)
• No known CVEs
• On the market since 2011 (stable on GitHub since 2015)
• Easy deployment and low learning curve

Watch out for:

• Contributors include diverse organizations. The contributor profile shows companies like ColorfulClouds Tech, Caiyun AI (Chinese AI company), and gaming companies like Hive Games and PlayFive. Depending on your compliance requirements, this may or may not matter
• S3 API coverage is broad but not complete. Some advanced ACL, Select API, and edge cases in multipart uploads differ from AWS behavior

Community feedback: SeaweedFS also has an Enterprise Edition with self-healing storage and better data protection, if you need commercial support.

Garage: Lightweight and Geo-Distributed

Garage is the Rust-based alternative designed for unreliable infrastructure.

Strengths:

• Single dependency-free binary
• Designed for geo-distribution over 200ms+ links
• Very low resource requirements (1GB RAM, ARM support)
• EU-funded (NGI POINTER, NLnet) active development
• AGPL-3.0 licensed
• 3 releases per year with clear versioning (v2.0, v2.1, v2.2)

The reality check:

• ~79 contributors (much smaller community than SeaweedFS)
• Mainly developed by Deuxfleurs community
• No Kafka integration
• No lifecycle policies
• No erasure coding (replication only)
• S3 API coverage is more limited than SeaweedFS

Community correction: The technology radar initially underscored Garage's IaC support. In reality, Garage has Helm charts and works well with Ansible. Cluster auto-initialization is the main operational gap, not deployment tooling.

Another community note: Some engineers argue Garage is more stable than RustFS (also Rust-based) and should not be dismissed as experimental.

Apache Ozone: Scale With Caveats

Apache Ozone brings massive-scale object storage from the Hadoop ecosystem.

Strengths:

• Apache 2.0 license
• 265 contributors with 20+ releases per year (very active)
• Designed for billions of objects
• Supports S3, OFS, O3FS protocols
• CentOS, RHEL/CentOS 7+, Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, SUSE support
• Binary available for Linux and Docker
• Kafka integration
• Used by Tencent and Cloudera

The deal-breaker for some:

• Does not support rolling updates. Every upgrade requires planned downtime. For a storage system, this is a significant operational risk
• Java-based with substantial resource requirements (Java 11 or Java 17 with OpenJDK)
• Not a single binary
• Documentation and Web UI are still in research/development phase

Storj: Decentralized but AGPL

Storj offers a decentralized storage network with an S3 gateway.

Strengths:

• Decentralized architecture with global node network
• Competitive pricing: $1.50/TB/month storage, $2.00/TB egress, $2.00/TB audit/repair
• Single-node mode supported

The concerns:

• AGPL-3.0 license
• More than 100 known CVEs. This is significantly worse than the other candidates
• Scenario: "project might die" concern exists. Decentralized storage models have a mixed track record for long-term sustainability
• The version is around v2, with active development described as having recently stabilized
• Key risk: resource allocation and community fragmentation

The Outsiders (Considered and Rejected)

The technology radar also evaluated solutions that did not make the shortlist:

Ceph (RGW):

• Extremely capable but massively overloaded for pure object storage
• Cannot run as a single binary; minimum deployment needs monitors, managers, OSDs, and the gateway
• 4GB+ RAM minimum (realistically much more)
• Best only if you already run Ceph for block/file storage or need unified storage

RustFS:

• Not production-ready despite the Rust foundation
• S3 API coverage around 60%
• Small community and limited documentation

Zenko:

• Multi-cloud replication by design (AWS, GCP, Azure, on-prem)
• Complex to deploy (Kubernetes-oriented)
• Scality's focus is on their commercial product; open source lags

The S3 Compatibility Problem

One evaluation participant put it best: "Not a word about the S3 API compatibility percentage. And there can be many surprises that you will have to eat in production."

This is the most underrated criterion. "S3-compatible" on a marketing page means almost nothing. Here is what actually breaks:

• Multipart upload edge cases. Aborted uploads, concurrent uploads to the same key, very large part counts
• ACL and policy behavior. Bucket policies and IAM-style policies have subtle differences or are missing entirely
• Event notifications. S3 event notifications (for Lambda, SQS) are partially implemented or missing
• Versioning. Object versioning support ranges from full to absent
• Lifecycle rules. Expiration and transition rules may be incomplete
• Select API. S3 Select (query CSV/JSON/Parquet in-place) is rarely supported
• Object locking. Retention policies and compliance locks are often missing

If your application uses basic operations (Put, Get, List, Delete, multipart upload), most alternatives work. If you depend on advanced features, you must test against your actual workload before committing.

Technology Radar: How to Run Your Own Evaluation

The structured approach from the radar is worth adopting:

1. Define criteria categories with weighted importance (licensing, operations, quality, functionality, security, maturity, risks)
2. Score with multiple teams. Different teams with different experience levels catch different issues
3. Include an "outsiders" table. Track rejected options with reasons so you do not re-evaluate them
4. Move products between tiers. Start broad, narrow down. The radar should be a living document
5. Test S3 API compatibility against your actual application, not against a specification checklist

The key insight: technology selection at scale is not about finding the "best" product. It is about finding the most appropriate product for your specific constraints (licensing, team expertise, infrastructure, compliance) and ensuring maximum standardization across teams.

Decision Framework

Need Apache-2.0 and maximum maturity? SeaweedFS. Most contributors, longest track record, best documentation.

Need geo-distribution on cheap hardware? Garage. Built for exactly this use case.

Already in the Hadoop ecosystem? Ozone. But accept the rolling update limitation.

Want managed/decentralized storage? Storj. But audit the CVE history carefully.

Need maximum S3 compatibility? None of the open-source options match MinIO's ~95% coverage. Test your specific API usage patterns.

Just need it to work with minimal ops? SeaweedFS or Garage. Both deploy as single binaries with low learning curves.

---

At Akmatori, we support any S3-compatible backend for self-hosted deployments. Our AI agents store investigation artifacts, incident attachments, and diagnostic results in whatever object storage you run. SeaweedFS and the former MinIO are the most common among our users.