Filestash: A self-hosted Open Source multi browser

Product Discussions
1

Filestash is a self-hosted open-source Dropbox alternative that supports multiple user collaboration and a dozen of storage modules.
With Filestash, you can connect to Amazon S3, Dropbox, Google Drive, FTPS and add more storage modules.

It is working with S3 credentials with Storj DCS already, check it out on my Sintel folder:

It is even on the Amazon marketplace.

@bre Maybe something for the showcasing category?
Seeing this I am getting so many ideas: Storj could link to the Filestash website and advertise this as alternative access option. Storj could host it and offer an easy access to Storj DCS. Storj could write its own plugin like Backblaze to become more visible. Storj could team up with that project and offer its free tier to their users. This could even be an interesting thing for those users who are looking for a Dropbox like alternative as users or as providers.

3 Likes
2

image
image741Ă—326 12.3 KB

Here is my experience using your link.

3

I am getting an error currently as well:

Oops!
<html> <head><title>504 Gateway Time-out</title></head> <body> <center><h1>504 Gateway Time-out</h1>

I have just tried with a new Access Grant.

But it is easy to try with own S3 credentials:

https://demo.filestash.app/login

I guess we need to wait and see if it gets fixed. :neutral_face:

Edit: I have no idea to which gateway the message is referring to. Could it be https://gateway.storjshare.io ?

4

Check again, seems to be working now again:

Screenshot_2022-08-06_074645
Screenshot_2022-08-06_0746451210Ă—574 30.9 KB

5

image

This time I tried the 4k. We might end up troubleshooting for them. :slight_smile:

6

Yes I can confirm:

The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.

But sintel_2048_surround_512kb.mp4 is working:

Screenshot_2022-08-06_080353
Screenshot_2022-08-06_0803531231Ă—914 48 KB

But it’s a demo page so I wouldn’t expect the best conditions for streaming.

7

It’s the main reason why it should rather work. You give demo page to potential client and this doesn’t look good.

8

Yes and no. If you have to pay for servers and bandwidth then there is a tradeoff.

But anyone can try it and run it on their own server to check it out.
There is even a Docker image: https://hub.docker.com/r/ugeek/filestash

Edit: With more many, maybe they can pay for better servers?

9

Another good one!
Have passed this along internally.
You are on fire this weekend with the good ideas :smiley:

10

But it’s a demo page so I wouldn’t expect the best conditions for streaming.

Yep. Everytime you try to stream a video, it creates an HLS stream via ffmpeg which is quite costly from a CPU point of view. Take that to the point that thousands of people come everyday you end up with a demo instance that is being abused quite a lot. Having good SLAs on the demo instance would cost multiple thousands per month to accomodate everyone trying to stream videos, hence when someone abuse the service, the demo instance goes down and I restart it, again and again and again. It’s not the best solution but it makes the bill fix with no surprise

It’s the main reason why it should rather work. You give demo page to potential client and this doesn’t look good.

This is exactly why I’m trying to provide SLAs on top for the people who are actually willing to contribute. In practice that’s about 0.001% of the visitors who use the demo and with this kind of conversion rate it’s not possible to provide something that will scale up and down properly.

2 Likes