Radar · Diagram Design

Storage backends · Capability radar

Four object-storage candidates scored 0–10 across five workload dimensions. The chart is a decision tool — the recommended option carries the only colored fill; everything else sits in the muted comparison palette.

Storage backends · Capability radar Radar chart comparing MinIO, Amazon S3, Ceph, and Google Cloud Storage across five storage capabilities. Small-file handling Large-object reads Write throughput Operational simplicity Iceberg integration 10 8 6 4 2 LEGEND MinIO · recommended Amazon S3 Ceph Google Cloud Storage

RECOMMENDED

MinIO

9 across the board, weakest only on large-object reads. The clear pick when small-file performance and Iceberg integration matter and you can run the operator yourself.

Amazon S3

The reference implementation: top-class on large-object reads and write throughput, but a hard step down on operational simplicity once you factor in IAM, lifecycle, and bucket policy sprawl.

Ceph

Capable across the board, but the lowest score on operational simplicity. Pick it when you already run Ceph or need block + object + file from one cluster — not for a fresh greenfield.

Google Cloud Storage

Solid middle path. No standout dimension — which is itself an answer when the team optimises for "boring, managed, fine."