forest

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

forest's Achievements

New User

New User (1/3)

  1. Thanks so much for the screen shots! Very helpful. I indeed think it is number of files, you have about 2k and I have about 100k (home folder) and a crapier computer. I guess my wish was that I would just have a mirror of my computer on my sever update automaticaly, but it dosen't seem possible. My question is... why dosen't AeroFS have this problem (linear lag proportional to # of files). Feels like BTSync scans all folders regularly while AeroFS just looks for changes in files.
  2. It's an interesting question since I hae seen CPU usage increase linearly with size of the folder, so that my computers (both mac and windows) can't really do over ~500 GB without effecting everyday usage (even with folder_rescan_interval turned to infinity). Anyone else notice this? It's the reason I turned to AeroFS.
  3. So I think this is all very consistant. It looks like BTSync scales badly with number of files. "TheDurch" you have 2% usage synching ~100GB of files. I was getting 14% CPU with ~350 GB on my older 2009 MacBook Pro and v1.2.67. "JimmyTheSaint" I think I'm experiencing the same loads as you refered to in your thread, with similar numbers of files. It looks like from these estimates, depending on the machine, BTSync will break at about 2-4 TB of data. So unfortunately the application is probably limited to smaller folders. I don't care if my server has ~10% load consistantly, but that can't happen on my laptop. If there is an archetecture change that's upcoming that would be very interesting. Or if I've missed something, or if anyone knows the root cause, I'd be interested.
  4. Hi, I'm experiencing consistant ~15% CPU usage with about 500 GB synched. Folder_rescan_interval is set very high and the problem goes down when I remove all synch folders (0.5% when idle without anything to sync). Dropbox, for example can scale well without a CPU hit on the same box. So, it looks like maybe BTSync is parsing folders all the time to look for changes (not just during folder_rescan_intervals) whereas dropbox is using more of an interupt type system, where the OS just tells it if something changes in monitored folders. Am I understanding this right, and if so, is this a permanent structural issue in BTSync?
  5. Yeah, I checked my cable modem (turned it off and connected the two computers directly) no dice, same speed. Gigabit speeds via FTP, SMB, etc. The only thing I can think of is protocol overhead or BTSync software issues. Even AeroFS runs at gigabit speeds. No idea what else to check.
  6. So the connection icon are arrows when they are there (occasionally there are neither). Also, although one computer has a fixed IP, the other will be a laptop, so a constantly changing IP. The only thing that might make sense is the router issue, although I have a gigabit switch downstream of the cable modem, I'll investigate that issue. Also, the PC is slow, so I'm thinking that might be an issue if BT takes a bit of overhead above FTP.
  7. Hello, I'm acquainting myself with bittorrent sync, but I think I've done my due diligence. Problem is BTSync is incredibly slow over the locally. On the gigabit LAN I'm getting a bursty 100k/s average. Is this an artifact of the BT protocol or is it a settings issue? I can transfer over the network otherwise at 8MB/s continuous. Also, I do have lan_encrypt_data off and lan_use_tcp on on both computers (a Macbook Pro and a PC). Any hints as to why this might be, or is BTSync limited by the protocol? Thanks!