Discovered that you can replace sshfs with rclone.
And the project appear to be way more active : https://github.com/rclone/rclone
Wasabi seems like the most expensive here, with the caveat that Hetzner requires ordering discrete steps of storage rather than the 'pay-as-you-go' model of the other two
Hetzner is the cheapest; however, your data is stored in Germany or Finland. They have free bandwidth, but you are limited to 10 connections at a time.
Backblaze B2 has 4 regions across the globe, storage is $5/mo, there is no minimun retention time, but does have a cost for API Calls(transactions), and in addition charges for egress data(downloads), so your $5/TB is a variable factor, and if you use your data, you may not achieve $5/TB, the cost will grow depending on the use case(there are free levels of transactions and egress)
Wasabi is $7/TB and has 13 regions across the globe, with free egress and no api charges. It does have 90-day minimum storage charge, which means you are billed for every object for 90 days regardless of if you delete it before 90 days. In addition, the free egress has limits to prevent system abuse. There is a 30-day deleted storage charge available if you purchase in bulk with their RCS(reserved capacity) storage plan. It's good if you want to store a lot of data that does not need deletion.
I have accounts with all 3 of these for different use cases.
I'm pretty disappointed overall by the price increase for storage. Compared to when they launched B2, they now need 1/4 as many servers with 1/2 the upfront cost to store each petabyte.
rclone mount :sftp,host=example.com:path/to/dir /tmp/mountpoint
See: https://rclone.org/commands/rclone_mount/#mounting-on-macos
If your workflow relies on a VFS that isn't NFS/SMB then don't use MacOS. fuse-t is kind of clever in that it spins up a TCP server that transpiles NFS requests into FUSE requests, but it comes with a bit of a cost and eats a TCP port. The one benefit is that you can actually mount and use a file system entirely in userspace this way, which you can't do on Linux without sandboxing (fusermount3 is SUID to get around this).
I have never heard of someone running out of TCP ports on a personal computer since, well, the invention of TCP on personal computers.
FUSE-T seems more future proof (no kext) and probably less likely to completely hang your Mac, but could potentially be even slower since it’s another abstraction layer in between.
It’s odd that there aren’t any great open source SFTP solutions for the Mac. CyberDuck and FileZilla are barely passable.
I think what hangs the Mac isn't the remote file system as such, but rather some local app or (more likely) low-level OS service assuming that all mounted filesystems are local (or at least low-latency and highly available).
TIL, thank you!
I'm really sad about losing native SSHFS capabilities on macOS (via FUSE, due to the kernel extension deprecation/ban).
I could even get behind the idea of banning all network file systems, but the fact that I can now use SMB and WebDAV(!), but not the one that I actually use all the time, is quite frustrating.
Sometimes you can manage to get things to use the ssh_config again (e.g. with xpra you can do "--ssh=ssh" but other times I've not yet figured a workaround.