How does this compare to Amazon's own offering in this space, the "AWS Storage Gateway"? It can also back various storage protocols with S3, using SSDs for cache, etc. (https://aws.amazon.com/storagegateway/features/)
Great question! We fill the same role as AWS Storage Gateway (and I used to work closely with that team when I was at AWS, lots of respect for what they do). AWS Storage Gateway is built primarily as an appliance to be installed on instances in your own data center to ease migration to the cloud. Many customers do deploy Storage Gateway on EC2 because they want these features in the cloud itself. However, the "appliance" design of Storage Gateway makes it unsuitable for this purpose. For example, Storage Gateway is not designed to run in a cluster for high-availability and doesn't have access to durable, long-term storage to stage and cache writes.
On the other hand, Regatta is designed as a cloud-native gateway product. Regatta's elastic, durable caching layer allows us to efficiently cache large data sets without thrashing, and always efficiently perform writes. Because Regatta is designed to be highly-available, customers don't have to worry about downtime for patching or deployments.
Also true! If you look at their site, they're really targeting folks to deploy it into their data centers to provide on-premises caching of resources in AWS, rather than providing a high-speed cache within AWS for file-based applications.
