knwpsk

Upvote. Agree. This describes my experience, too.

Updated to 1.4.110. I now have three different Windows machines where btsync fails to start up with Windows startup/login. Have to start it manually. Happy to explain/report more, etc, if that's useful. Tell me where. Thanks

Thanks, RomanZ, Is there a better proxy partner app for btsync? Agree, I haven't been able to find any documentation on what protocols Ultrasurf does support. AND: how can one determine what btsync is or isn't doing, with respect to its peer-to-peer communications? I'm scrounging thru the sync.log but not finding anything deterministic. I see it "sending ping to..." remote addresses, but don't see more that would tell me "succeeded" or "failed" etc. Is there a Help page to describe the connection process, the proxy functionality, and the resulting logs? I'm happy to read up.

Watching this, having similar problems. Any updates?

I guess I spoke too soon. Worked yesterday, not working today. No idea why. Wish I had some help diagnosing what it is or isn't doing.

GM, I was using 1.4.72. Couldn't get proxy working, tried all options. Had a back-and-forth with Support, no help. Yesterday upgraded to 1.4.83, and it "just worked." Further detail: The machine behind the proxy was trying to connect with two machines on the other side. After I upgraded machine 1, it immediately connected to machine 2 (which was new, and was already on 1.4.83). But 1 didn't connect to 3, which was on an older version. I just upgraded machine 3, and now all of them are connecting. So my somewhat blind advice is, if you're trying to use btsync with a proxy, upgrade ALL of your machines to btsync 1.4.83 (or later, depending on when you read this). I think it's unfortunate that the GUI doesn't give us more feedback on connectivity -- i.e. "Connected [or unable to connect] to Proxy," "Proxy refused connection," "Connected to directory server," etc. Would help tremendously in trying to self-assess problems.

Updated to btsync 1.4.83 today, and it now works seamlessly with Ultrasurf. No explanation why.

Update to my own post... I kept monkeying around with the new Advanced settings until I got something to work. Turns out the new version is having trouble finding peer machines -- on the same subnet -- on my corporate network. Unclear why (referring again to my comments below about lack of visibility and the need for more troubleshooting tools). On my laptop, yesterday, I had it syncing all folders with two peer desktops. Overnight I shut down laptop and this morning restarted... and it wouldn't connect to either peer PC. When I added ONE peer machine under "Use Predefined Hosts" -- then my laptop found BOTH of the peer machines. I added a host to other folders, same result. Prior versions of btsync found the same local peers without any help. So... I'm able to sync all folders on local network now. Still unable to connect to anything outside local network -- can't get proxy to work. Don't know why. Still wondering if anyone knows how to get btsync to work with Ultrasurf.

I've tried several proxy configs and none of them seem to be working. My sync folders are not finding their peers outside the firewall; and the Check For Updates button returns a failure to connect. Would be really, really helpful if there was some logging to tell me "can't resolve the proxy address you entered" or "resolved the address but can't connect" or "proxy is asking for credentials" or whatever. And a "test your proxy settings" button would be terrific. Right now it seems I'm flying blind... ALSO -- does anyone know how to configure btsync to connect using Ultrasurf? That would be really helpful!

I might have found something useful, or else a related edge case. Was having some problems syncing a large directory that was previously sync'd. On both machines, I deleted the folder from Btsync, then re-added the same directory on both. I observed that on both machines, it *started* to index the directory, and it indicated it had finished, but apparently didn't finish. On both machines, Btsync showed the folder to have N files with a total of N size; it had different numbers for that directory on each machine, and both were very very wrong numbers (much smaller than the actual directory). My suspicion is that once btsync started to exchange data between the two machines, it stopped indexing prematurely. So, now, I'm doing the same process again. But this time, I only re-added the directory on ONE machine, and am waiting for it to fully index that machine before I re-add the directory to the other machine. So far it seems to be successfully re-indexing the whole directory without trouble -- it has indexed 8x more data than it reported last time. If my suspicion is correct -- that starting the transfer of data prematurely stopped the indexing process -- then this should probably be considered a "bug" that needs to be coded around. The app shouldn't start transferring data until the indexing process has completed successfully. Otherwise, one would see the problem that I saw: it would start trying to upload/download files that already exist on the peer machine, and encountering errors or version problems. (Update: my second attempt fixed the problem, when I allowed one machine to fully index before re-adding the directory to other machines. All machines are now fully synchronized, showing proper counts and file sizes, and not trying to overwrite each other with existing files.)

Is it possible to change the default folder where my phone camera stores photos, to a folder in the btsync-allowed directory?

D3rdon I confirm same as you described. Galaxy s5, Android 4.4.2

Bump for this issue. The suggestion above is to .syncIgnore MS Office "temp" files - is it correct that one would have to do this in EVERY folder? That's unreasonable. Couldn't we get a patch release that would ignore those files by default? My small brain wants to assume that that would be an easy answer. Thank you!

Greatmarko, Thanks again, but this leaves more questions. - I currently see an Up Arrow with a size of 3.2GB. But the sum of all current transfers ongoing is closer to 50 kBps. So the meaning of the Up Arrow is something nuanced, not simply "amount of data being sent/received." Any further details? - What's the difference between a "U" and an Up Arrow? I see both at different times, on the same machine. The status changes back and forth between letters and arrows. Both of my machines are running version 1.0.134. Currently one machine shows U:1.2GB, D:3.2GB; the other machine shows UP Arrow 3.2GB, DOWN Arrow 1.1GB. Both machines show the same two files in the Transfers tab.

Great page. Could anyone please add an explanation for the Status column on the Devices tab? What do these mean? U: (size) D: (size) Up/Down arrows I.e. does "U" mean "Waiting to upload" or "Actually uploading", etc.? What's the diff between a U and an up arrow? Etc. Thanks!