Introduction
Choosing the right self-hosted object storage solution for your VPS cluster deployment is crucial for performance, scalability, and cost-effectiveness. In 2025, four prominent solutions dominate the self-hosted object storage landscape: MinIO, Ceph RGW, SeaweedFS, and Garage.
Each solution offers unique strengths: MinIO excels in high-performance workloads with enterprise-grade features, Ceph RGW provides battle-tested reliability with advanced placement policies, SeaweedFS focuses on simplicity and horizontal scalability, while Garage offers lightweight deployment with strong consistency guarantees.
This comprehensive comparison analyzes performance benchmarks, erasure coding efficiency, S3-API compatibility, multi-tenant capabilities, and resource requirements to help you select the optimal object storage platform for your infrastructure needs.
Architecture and Deployment Models
MinIO: Distributed Architecture
MinIO implements a distributed architecture using server pools with strict erasure coding requirements. Each pool requires a minimum of 4 drives and supports up to 16 drives per set. The architecture ensures data durability through Reed-Solomon erasure coding.
Resource Requirements: 4-32 GB RAM per node, 4+ CPU cores recommended
MinIO’s deployment requires careful planning for drive distribution across nodes. A typical highly available MinIO cluster on VPS infrastructure demands consistent hardware specifications across all nodes.
Ceph RGW: Unified Storage Platform
Ceph RGW (RADOS Gateway) operates as a component within the broader Ceph ecosystem, leveraging the RADOS object store for backend storage. This architecture provides exceptional flexibility with customizable placement policies and multi-site replication.
- Crush Maps: Advanced data placement control
- Multi-Zone Support: Geographic distribution capabilities
- Tiered Storage: Hot/cold data management
Resource requirements are substantial, typically requiring 8-16 GB RAM per OSD and dedicated SSDs for metadata storage.
SeaweedFS: Simplicity-Focused Design
SeaweedFS adopts a master-volume server architecture inspired by Facebook’s Haystack. The system separates metadata management from data storage, enabling efficient small file handling and horizontal scaling.
The lightweight design requires minimal resources: 2-4 GB RAM per volume server and supports dynamic volume allocation based on usage patterns.
Garage: Rust-Based Efficiency
Garage implements a novel approach using consistent hashing with virtual nodes for data distribution. Written in Rust, it emphasizes memory safety and performance with minimal operational overhead.
Garage requires only 1-2 GB RAM per node and can operate effectively on resource-constrained VPS instances while maintaining strong consistency guarantees.
Performance Benchmarks 2025
Throughput Comparison
Recent benchmarks on identical 8-core VPS clusters with NVMe storage reveal significant performance differences:
- MinIO: 2.8 GB/s read, 2.1 GB/s write (4+4 EC)
- Ceph RGW: 1.9 GB/s read, 1.4 GB/s write (3+1 EC)
- SeaweedFS: 2.3 GB/s read, 1.8 GB/s write (no EC)
- Garage: 1.6 GB/s read, 1.2 GB/s write (3x replication)
MinIO demonstrates superior raw performance, particularly beneficial for high-throughput workloads like media processing or data analytics pipelines.
Latency Characteristics
Small object operations show different latency profiles:
- SeaweedFS: 2.1ms average (optimized for small files)
- MinIO: 3.8ms average
- Garage: 4.2ms average
- Ceph RGW: 6.3ms average
Erasure Coding and Data Durability
Erasure Coding Implementation
Each solution approaches erasure coding differently:
MinIO uses Reed-Solomon codes with configurable parity drives. Standard deployments use N/2 parity (4+4, 8+8), providing excellent storage efficiency while tolerating multiple drive failures.
Ceph RGW leverages RADOS erasure coding pools with flexible K+M configurations. The system supports advanced failure domains and can distribute parity across racks or data centers.
SeaweedFS implements erasure coding as an optional feature, with most deployments relying on replication for simplicity. When enabled, it supports configurable shard distribution.
Garage currently focuses on replication (3x default) rather than erasure coding, emphasizing operational simplicity over storage efficiency.
S3 API Compatibility and Features
API Completeness
MinIO offers the most comprehensive S3 compatibility, supporting advanced features like:
- Lifecycle policies and intelligent tiering
- Cross-region replication
- Lambda notifications and event processing
- Identity and access management (IAM)
Ceph RGW provides extensive S3 compatibility with unique features like multi-tenancy and federated deployments. It supports most AWS S3 operations including multipart uploads and bucket policies.
SeaweedFS implements core S3 operations effectively, though some advanced features like lifecycle policies require additional configuration or external tools.
Garage focuses on essential S3 operations with growing feature support. The lightweight implementation prioritizes reliability over feature completeness.
Multi-Tenant Isolation and Security
Multi-tenant isolation capabilities vary significantly across platforms:
MinIO provides robust tenant isolation through built-in IAM policies, bucket-level encryption, and network policies. The console offers comprehensive tenant management interfaces.
Ceph RGW excels in multi-tenancy with namespace isolation, per-tenant resource quotas, and sophisticated access control mechanisms. Users can be organized hierarchically with inherited permissions.
SeaweedFS supports basic multi-tenancy through access control but lacks advanced isolation features found in enterprise solutions.
Garage implements tenant-level separation through bucket ownership and access policies, suitable for moderate isolation requirements.
Use Case Recommendations
Enterprise Workloads
For enterprise-grade deployments requiring maximum performance and feature completeness, MinIO leads with comprehensive S3 compatibility and enterprise features. Consider MinIO when you need advanced IAM, lifecycle policies, or integration with existing AWS toolchains.
Unified Storage Infrastructure
Choose Ceph RGW when building comprehensive storage infrastructure requiring block, file, and object storage. The unified platform simplifies operations while providing advanced placement policies and geo-replication capabilities.
Lightweight Deployments
SeaweedFS suits scenarios requiring simple deployment with good small-file performance. The solution works well for content distribution networks or applications with extensive small object workloads.
Garage excels for resource-constrained environments where operational simplicity outweighs feature richness. Its Rust implementation provides excellent memory efficiency and reliability.
Integration Considerations
Consider integration requirements with backup solutions like Restic, BorgBackup, or Kopia when selecting your object storage platform. Most solutions work effectively with standard backup tools, though MinIO’s advanced features may provide additional optimization opportunities.
For VPS cluster deployments, evaluate your infrastructure’s characteristics alongside storage requirements. High-performance instances benefit from MinIO’s throughput capabilities, while resource-constrained deployments may prefer Garage’s efficiency.
Conclusion
The optimal self-hosted object storage solution depends on your specific requirements, infrastructure constraints, and operational preferences. MinIO delivers maximum performance and enterprise features, Ceph RGW provides comprehensive unified storage, SeaweedFS emphasizes simplicity and small-file optimization, while Garage offers lightweight efficiency.
Consider your erasure coding requirements, performance characteristics, and multi-tenant needs when making your selection. Each solution has proven reliability in production environments, with growing ecosystem support and active development communities.
For production deployments on high-performance VPS infrastructure, we recommend thorough testing with your specific workload patterns to validate performance assumptions and operational requirements.
