advhound

The Sync app you linked to worked great, thank you!

I am running Fedora 25 and have attempted to install Resilio Sync a number of different ways with no success. Specifically using these instructions, I got all the way through it until I try to run the "sudo yum install resilio-sync" command I got the following. Has anyone successfully installed Resilio Sync recently? Failed to synchronize cache for repo 'resilio-sync', disabling. Last metadata expiration check: 2:13:49 ago on Thu Apr 27 07:55:54 2017. No package resilio-sync available. Error: Unable to find a match.

Regarding the new Encrypted folder sync option, what is the best way to convert a standard folder sync relationship that is already established to be encrypted? In other words, I have 2 off-site peers that act as a backup. There is a large amount of data (~1 TB) synced, what is the best way to encrypt the data stored on those peers without having to re-sync the data?

Any idea why it does not work in my case? I have never successfully manually copied files and then synced RO. I did check "overwrite changed files". Does manually copying the file put a different date last edited on each file and BTSync considers it a different file, thus requiring a full resync? There was a message when I began syncing that files were changed on the RO side and that changes would not be synced, which makes sense as a RO. Is there a better method to copy files over than just in Windows Explorer? Thanks for your help, this has me scratching my head.

Is this also the case with RO folders? I have experienced situations multiple times (most recently it was with a 370 GB folder) where I manually copy files and then point sync towards that folder and it indexes for 20 min and then says out of Sync and randomly starts syncing (at low speeds of 15 kb/s) all of the data again, but the majority of the time it says there "out of sync." What's up with this? I should mention that the manual copy and then sync process works great for RW folders.

I really like the concept of the BitTorrent distributed protocol, but I am really confused and frustrated at what I am experiencing. I have noticed this several times, but always wrote it off as BTSync being early in beta or something along those lines, but I am really curious as to what is happening. When I am connected to 1 other peer and receiving updates on my desktop, I have a pretty good bandwidth of 10 MB/s. Once another peer comes online that is already up to date, and then begins to upload to the desktop, the download speed of the desktop diminishes dramatically down to less than 1 MB/s. So the distributed model is really cool in theory, but I am really frustrated at why this is. If the distributed model is working correctly, I should get 10 MB/s, plus whatever bandwidth the other peer is able to upload. It almost seems as though BitTorrent sync is not smart enough to recognize which of the peers has the highest bandwidth and gives that peer priority and allows the other peers to supplement. I have noticed this same issue since I began using BTSync a month ago, across 3 different 1.4 versions. I have noticed this in many different configurations, between different computers and on different networks, both LAN and WAN and it has bothered me enough that I would like understand why the distributed model is not working out in these cases.

Regardless of which solution I end up going with, we just hit the jackpot on a great deal on 3TB drives that we are going to sync between my brother, Dad and I. My first thought was to partition the drives right off the bat into 3 separate, 1 for each of us. Are there any downsides to this? Would you recommend another solution? The basic goal would be to have some form of separation in the case of a virus etc. and to a lesser extent to keep each other's data somewhat private, although I am syncing with family, so no big worries there. Penny for your thoughts!

Thank you for your input @Inh and @goli I am looking through the solutions you have recommended.

What are the best solutions you all have found to encrypt the folder the BTSync files are stored in? I have a good amount of files that are sensitive and I need to make them a bit more secure. I'd like something that protects well, but is not overly obtrusive or resource intensive. I am not all that familiar with the encryption world, so I am curious to hear your solutions. ES File explorer is able to encrypt the folder, but once it is decrypted, you have to manually re-encrypt the folder. I currently am encrypting my files on my Windows machine with BitLocker. Is there a encryption solution that you have used that protects the files cross-platform?

@j1miroquai Thanks for all of the feedback, I'm thinking it through. I may take you up on your offer on more specifics! Thanks again.

Hmm, you are making me think more optimistically about the Pi. Another issue I heard is that there pipe took an extremely long amount of time to index the files. How long did yours take to index? I wouldn't mind waiting overnight or 12 hours, even 24 hours on the long end, but a week plus seems almost unusable.

Is it true that there is a 1 gigabyte file limit with a Raspberry Pi as mentioned earlier in this thread?

@j1miroquai What advice would you recommend to "set it right"? I'd be curious to hear the details of your Pi builds? What HDD enclosure do you use etc.

I have 27,000 files now at about 67 GB. Do you think the Pi would be able to keep up and allow the number and size of files to grow in the future? Using the 1kb/file for memory usage, I'd be using just over half the memory to sync and then add the OS memory needs to that. That would allow some room to grow in the next couple years.

@RomanZ, what sort of energy efficient setup would you recommend with the best bang for buck to run 24/7? I'd consider picking up something used as well. I do not need the ability to run RAID setups etc. at this time as my files will be backed up remotely. @piotrnik Good suggestion. The NUC does look like a decent setup, although once fitting with memory and an SSD, you're going to be over $300. @freigeist What setup in specific would you recommend for a PC with good idle power consumption? @ricklahaye Is there a consensus on HDD wear to spin down a HDD compared to leaving it spinning all the time?

Hello all, My brother and I have been using BTSync for a couple weeks now and have been really impressed by it. We are going to build a system to mirror our data to each other's house by using BTSync. Our goals are to keep it as low power, quite and reliable as possible while sticking to a reasonable budget, hopefully under $300 for each build. We are not expecting these to be extremely fast, but instead the qualities mentioned above. We leaning towards building off of the Raspberry Pi platform, and we need your input on the following: -Is the WD20EZRX hard drive a good choice for a reliable, cool and quite hard drive? Again, we don't need a screaming fast hard drive for this setup. Cost effective and reliable. -We each need 2TB of storage, so each Pi will need 4TB attached to it. Would you recommend to get 2 separate 2TB drives, or to go with (1) 4TB hard drive on each build? -Which hard drive enclosure do you recommend to run the drive(s) 24/7? We would like to run the hard drives without a fan to keep the power usage as low as possible and to keep them quite. We are even open to a solution that doesn't enclose the hard drives and allows the heat to dissipate into the air instead of enclosing it. We could enclose the entire system, Raspberry Pi and all in a cage-type cover that ventilated extremely well. -This is related to the enclosure, but should we be looking for enclosures that allow spin down, or is that harder on the hard drives than letting them spin 24/7? Is there an enclosure that you guys have successfully used with a Pi? -What would the bottleneck in this system be? Any other input you may have, or caveats that we are overlooking would be helpful! -Is there a summary on how encryption could work in this arrangement across different OS's, including Android?