New Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About haraldthi

  • Rank
    New User
  1. I have a somewhat different problem. I have five machines running on different platforms. Several of them have an archive of the iPhone Camera Backup, but they keep generating .conflict files even when they're completely equal. (I have tested some of them with unix diff.) This just happens over time, no interaction whatsoever, except the Iphone Bittorrent Sync app being shut down from the low memory conditions of my Iphone 4. (Which also has made some corrupt databases for me.) It seems kind of stupid. Could perhaps btsync check if .conflict files are identical to the original and not make a .conflict file if they are? And,best way to delete these .conflict files is to shut down all btsync programs I have running and remove the files? Or would it create a corrupted database again?
  2. Bittorrent is made for large files, and it's good for that. However the splitting up the file in pieces before transmitting them in semi-random order adds a significant overhead per file transfer, and this becomes a nuisance when transferring small files. There was a project in the Debian community once, to transfer the package archive over Bittorrent. It would be ideal for offloading the package archive, but they gave up. In part because most of the files in the archive are too small to be transferred effectively with Bittorrent. Now it shows up in btsync again. Partially, when I use btsync to back up and share sound files and photos. Each file is rather small, but as a collection it becomes huge. Btsync isn't very good at it, with frequent stops in file transfer to catch up with its overhead. I also use btsync on an Iphone 4, and the app crashes frequently when I use it to start playing a sound file I have synced. (I'm in a (rather minor) band, and I record what we do so we can learn from it). I guess it's due to btsync taking up a lot of memory, and I guess it's what cell phones and pads in general do to manage: Kill processes when memory becomes limited. If btsync could use less memory most of the time, it could be kept longer in memory and be better at running in background. So to the point. I know it's kind of a "kill your darling" request, but could btsync not keep its full synchronization protocol in memory all the time? Instead, it could detect smaller files (less than 10 MB could be a good default) and transfer them from one computer to the other the boring way it's been done since the beginning of file transfer? It would be lighter on resources, and since there are probably a lot more files in the queue anyway, btsync can choose to transfer one file from one computer and another file from another computer and share resources that way. Then, when there's a larger file on the queue, the full file splitting tool can be loaded to memory (via a library, a subprocess or whatever) and then forgotten from memory when there are no more large files to transfer. This way, btsync can work well for both small and large files, plus work better on memory constrained devices. What do you think?