boruguru

Do we need to special settings, when you do this. Point is that, I don't want to delete anything that I delete on phone, on the sync'd folder. (Is that the default behavior on a phone?)

I agree. We are using this for non-commercial use, like sharing few files with friends. There are many free services like google drive, box.com etc, where they provide they server and bandwidth. In btsync, it our server, our bandwidth and there are many software to send files as well. Charging a subscription is ridiculous. It is not acceptable from a such a reputed company as bittorrent to start charging for a subscription service. What they provide, just the software, and a tracker server. It will be matter of time, something like syncthing will kill btsync in my opinion.

Keep the promise. Bad ethics. Keep the features we use to have in 1.4.

Why Limits. This is not good. Please give us all features we had in 1.4 in 2.0 free version as promised.

Sync 1.4 has been getting to a stage where it worked well, bugs getting fixed, and becoming usable. Now 2.0 with the promise of keeping all features of 1.4 Free, and it seems like a broken promise. Version 2.0 is hard to use as well, too complicated for simple use. Can btsync at least maintain 1.4 or make version 2.0 simple. In version 2.0, if you disconnect a folder from one node, it gets disconnected from all connected nodes. It is too much to deal with for a simple use case. Not so good, don't kill a good product by make it too expensive to own, and complicated.

If this happen again I will provide more information with a process dumps. So far that did not happen. May be it is a first time, when it start up with many files?

I installed 2.0.52, on windows 8.1 64 bit and added a share from a 1.4 with about 100k files, with Do not Sync-All option. After about 5 minutes, UI Reported Not-responding, and CPU was 100% for about 5 mins, and went back to normal. If that happen again, what type of information will be useful to collect to debug the issue? (Or this is normal behavior) Now I see on the destination folder lot of .bts files. My expectation is if I click of them, it should sync the file. But nothing seems to happen. What are my next steps? Should I wait longer (I waited 1 Hr - UI reports all in sync, file I am trying to bring over is small, all peers are local). Or should I restart / reboot?

Thank you and that clarifies it. Why all information is loaded into memory when sync starts, rather you can keep them in SQLiteDB to reduce the memory consumption?. I think SQLite is a very efficient Database. This way you won't have a issue in scaling when number of files grow to a very large size. (I am guess you are loading all into memory as I saw that in another post, may be I am wrong.) Thank you if you can further clarify. BG

How does btsync scale, if it don't keep the indexed information some where in a cache. If everything is in memory, every time btsync start, does btsync need to re-read all the data from disk and re-index? Will get worst, when someone try to sync folders larger than 4TB. It is command today to have disk sizes larger than 4TB or so. Is btsync not scalable?? May be I am missing something? Can someone explain?

I have a relevant question to this, so I am going to hi-jack thread and ask it here. If I disconnect and re-add back a folder, should btsync start a re-index process? Example : If I have 1TB of files & if I disconnect and re-add the folder, does btsync need to re-read 1TB worth or data, or btsync has a way to quickly identify nothing has changed as it keep checksum/timestamp data some where? I also read in a thread, btsync need about 300-400 bytes of memory per file, is it to keep checksums of files? Is there a checksum database that it maintain in disk somethere? If everything is in memory, does btsync need to re-generate the memory checksums everytime it start? Some clarification here is appreciated? Thank you,