There is specifically block storage service (EBS) and falvirs of it like EBS multi-attach and EFS that can ne used if there is a need to port software/databases to the cloud with low level filesystem support.
Why would we need to do it on object storage which addresses a different type of storage need.
Nevertheless there are projects like EMRFS and S3 file system mount points that try to provide files stem interfaces to workloads that need to see S3 as a filesystem.
AWS Glue is another option which is "serverless" ETL. Source and Destination can be S3 data lakes read through a data catalog (hive or glue data catalog). During processing AWs Glue can optionally use S3 [3,4,5] for shuffle partition.
I think we're talking about two different things. I was addressing a section in the article about running databases backed by s3. It's less about s3 needing to act as a filesystem, and more about all of the rdbms features that come along with the various types of DB transactions. It's a solved problem with the libraries I mentioned. Not something I'd ever recommend to build on your own. Been there done that when those solutions were still nascent. Wasn't worth the effort vs just using an rdbms.
The problem that emrfs is trying to solve doesn't cover the rdbms scenarios like row-level updates and deletes.
Why would we need to do it on object storage which addresses a different type of storage need.
Nevertheless there are projects like EMRFS and S3 file system mount points that try to provide files stem interfaces to workloads that need to see S3 as a filesystem.