M-Pixel

Scenario: As a user, I run into a problem with Sync. I want to provide useful information to the developers so that they are actually able to solve the problem with a reasonable amount of effort. Current situation: I turn on debug logging in Sync's settings. I do a web search to find out where I can find my log. Sync documentation on logging defers to Sync documentation on "data folder" location. This documentation shows a path that is only accessible as a root user on Android, and notes such. Ideal situation: Sync for Android provides either A) An option to set the location of the log file B) An action to send the log file

@Gane O'dwyer I'm still interested in learning the answer to this question, too. Could you please discuss it here instead of in a private Zendesk issue? Is it just another category of loggable information, or does it actually augment functionality? If so, how?

KeyBase had the same exact issue, and was able to fix it trivially and within a few days of reporting: https://github.com/keybase/keybase-issues/issues/3118

+1 for aliasing and/or foldering I'd like to note that this has the most +1s out of all threads in the Feature Requests sub-forum (excluding "Now Implemented!" and "Wishlist" threads).

In order to confirm whether it's a problem with Zypper, or the repository itself. If I did not get a permission error in the browser, then I would have started troubleshooting Zypper. Seeing the error in the browser let me know that it's a service problem that I can't do anything about, so I shouldn't spend any time looking into ways to fix it.

This started happening again. Installed Sync through the repo last week. Now I get "Access Denied" even when visiting the https://linux-packages.resilio.com/resilio-sync/rpm/ URL directly in my web browser.

Linux currently has a crippled, Dropbox-like Selective Sync implementation that doesn't let me search for yet-to-be-synced files, unlike the Mac OS and Windows versions, which use placeholder files. It would be great if the Linux version handled selective with placeholders exactly in the same way as on other systems.

Thanks, Moe, that's exactly what I was looking for!

The GUI claims that Standard Folders are "Best for syncing your own devices", so I've been using them for folders that I don't plant to share with any other identities. But this explanation of the differences between Standard and Advanced seems to indicate that they only exist for backwards-compatibility, and have no actual benefits over Advanced. My question is, should I continue using Standard for new folders that I don't expect to share with others, because there is less overhead, or should I stick with Advanced for everything because there's zero benefit to Standard over Advanced?

Any insight on this from the developers would be really useful. Thanks in advance!

I have several "top-level" folders that I all want to sync the same way to the same computers: Documents, pictures, videos, etc. I have two choices: Sync one "Sync" folder that contains everything, or sync each categorical folder individually. Does one of these two approaches have significant performance benefits over the other?

Interesting, so if it doesn't increase performance, doesn't save resources, and doesn't provide extra robustness, then what is the point of having it? Does it decrease the likeliness of corrupt database if Sync crashes?

There are a number of posts that recommend disabling journaling for those who are experiencing high disk use from the .journal files. I was wondering what the side-effects are of doing so. The feature is there and turned on be default for a reason, clearly, but what is that reason? I'm familiar with filesystem journaling in terms of the filesystem itself, however I'm not certain what functionality it provides in the case of Sync in particular. In addition, I have a few specific impact questions below: Will disabling journaling increase or decrease the general performance of Sync? Apart from disk space, does it increase or decrease system resource usage? (CPU/RAM/IO) Does disabling it increase the likelihood of file conflicts?

It would be nice to have an option to see IP address, and potentially other information on how I'm connected to peers. This would help to diagnose connectivity. I recently added known hosts and opened ports in order to try to make LAN sync faster (I can't get it over 1.5MB/s for single large files, 100KB/s for several small files), but I'm unsure of whether the direct connection is working or not because my speeds are the same, and the peer list just gives the computer name with no other information.

Zilexa, have you had success with multiple instances? I'm going to try it myself soon, as I'm in the same situation (one server with a massive RAID, two bts identities that I want to keep separate).

I would also love for this to be supported!