bmattis

Members
  • Content Count

    9
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

About bmattis

  • Rank
    New User

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. Now the QNAP support has done some analysis and it seems like it's a memory thing making the unit unresponsively super-slow. They say that: So, the NAS can simply not behave robustly when it runs out of memory -- which the user will probably not be able to know beforehand that it does. One way I found to minimize the problem is to disable the zip file scanning in the antivirus settings, or at least to greatly reduce the size of zip files allowed for scanning. When changing that setting from 200 MB to 10 MB, the antivirus scan actually finished in a couple of hours, a
  2. No logs or dumps, since it doesn't complete the scan. No interesting dumps when Sync is disabled and the scan completes. I have filed a ticket at QNAP a week ago, and they are remotely checking my NAS at the moment. We'll see what they say. Anyway I wanted to inform all parties that are somehow related to the problem.
  3. Doesn't seem very similar. My *NAS* stops responding, not my Sync app. And I *have* antivirus enabled. :-)
  4. Yes, the built-in antivirus in the QNAP NAS UI. If the Sync app is activated, the antivirus doesn't have a chance to finish and give any report. If Sync is deactivated, the antivirus doesn't find any problems, so no interesting logs or reports. The scan job has the following settings: Scan 2 specific folders (one of which is Sync'ed), weekly, quick scan, scan compressed file content, deep scan for document files, only report the virus. The virus definitions update daily. My QNAP NAS is a TS-131.
  5. Since some months back I've encountered my QNAP NAS totally unresponsive once a week, needing a reboot to be usable again. With help from QNAP's support, I've narrowed the problem down to the Sync app in combination with the antivirus scan provided by QNAP: - I have the antivirus scan scheduled to run once every week. One of the folders in the scan job is synced by the Bittorrent Sync app on the NAS. - After some hour of antivirus scanning, before the antivirus reports a finished scanning, the NAS becomes impossible to reach on the network. It happens every time, and the NAS h
  6. Sounds great! :-) Another aspect that I forgot to mention is the need of an indication of agreeing or disagreeing clients in regard to the IgnoreLists. As of now, you never know for sure if the IgnoreList is working or not since there is no indication that both sides have matching text files.
  7. The fabulous Bittorrent team would really need to make a clear and user-friendly GUI for file & folder selection. The current old-school .SyncIgnore text file solution is surely preferred by some computer boffins, but it is way too cryptic for the broad range of users, and - as this discussion thread shows - even the relatively nerdy of us have a hard time actually getting it right (or even understanding the exact results of what we try). In a sync/backup tool, every uncertainty is potentially dangerous. A new GUI-based selection could still be combined with the old text file solutio
  8. Not working for me either. It keeps on syncing stuff in the AppData directory. This is on a WinXP PC which backs up a read-only sync from a WinVista PC. Btw, do the .syncignore *files* need to be identical, or is it the parsed text data that needs to be identical? In other words, does a linebreak or a whitespace in one of the files break the validity? And is there a chance to see if two folders have mismatching .syncignore files, via a warning message or log entry or something? I guess every user would always want to get alerted about this immediately.
  9. Hi, first of all I want to say that I'm really happy to have found BitTorrent Sync. Wonderful stuff! Now I'm trying to set it up in the best way, and my primary question is about re-indexing. As a little server I have a netbook running BTsync, and a NAS storing all my synced files. The NAS is working almost all the time, since BTsync says "indexing...". I assume this takes much longer time on a NAS than it would on a local drive. (I know that I can change the rescan interval, but it still takes a lot of time when the indexing is running.) I find the eternal chewing on the NAS both annoyi