laurin1

Yea, I'm done with this product. I've spent the last week switching everything over to Syncthing and will not be renewing my license for Sync this year.

I've never had an issue with this, but I did "Reset this PC" on one of my machines today and now it fails with this: Devices not linked Please checked that both devices are online BTW, this machine runs Sync as service. Also, the machine now shows up on other machines but is Disconnected. The machine in question always goes through the process of trying to download certificate and folder data, then fails.

I don't have any of these files in .SyncUser1503178328 directory. All of those are in the parent directory of .SyncUser1503178328. However, I removed the folder with the error and added it back and the error has not returned (knock on wood), which never fixed the issue in 2.7.1. I'm tempted to do this at some point, as I've had this identity in place now for a very long time. However, I'm a little wary since my license (I have a Business License) is tied to the identity, is it not?

I just installed 2.7.2, due to having a problem with the application crashing constantly (2.7.0), both the desktop and service version, on 5 different machines: Support replied: However, as I told them: So I tried 2.7.2 and already getting "Database Error":

Oh, that and downgraded to 2.7.0 - I believe there is a bug in 2.7.1 that caused this in the first place, because prior to that change, this all worked fine for years.

Well, what I did was removed the folder from Sync and removed the .sync from all machines, then added them all back and now it's working fine (no permission changes needed).

Yea, I know, I saw that. There is nothing wrong with the file system, that is a problem with Sync. None of the machines are out of space. This has happened before (on many occasions). Right now, everything is synced, but what you pointed out is a bug in the Sync software. I have tried doing smaller folders, but the problem is there are so many of them, that it takes me FOREVER to configure a new machine (or a rebuild), which I do all too frequently).

I've had numerous issues with 2.7.1, including this one: The only solution I found was downgrading to 2.7.0. My problems started with a database error. I removed and added back the folder in question, but never would finish on all machines.

FYI, I've tried restarting both machines, and this is a new machine I just added (well, I removed as a peer, deleted all the files, and resynced).

Why, at times, does it just stop transferring files? KDAVISTEST has been stuck here for 45 minutes: From KDAVIS:

Installing using the UI works fine for me. FYI, I install using credentials (because I have to), then change it to Local System, so I don't have to worry about password changes. Works just fine!

On 2 machines, the network service install (upgrade from 2.6.3) just exits, no error, no nothing.

Nice write up.

Wonderful.

I'm not sure of the cause, but I've had this happen now twice in the last few weeks. Both times, it was one of my devices that runs Sync as a service. Restarting the service on that machine cause this to just "magically go away".

Oh, yea, forgot that was even a link. Well, now the issue is gone.

A folder has been stuck on at 90% for some time. I restarted the client but still stuck. Any way to "unstick" it?

I agree, but that is what support told me I had to do .

I’ve already starting deploying to machines! Seriously, if you are going to pull a version, you should post a notice of why! Do I need to go back and downgrade my machines or what???

Can someone please kick this user!?! https://forum.resilio.com/profile/63826-ysossuff/ For those of us that follow the whole forum, we are getting hammered.

FYI, the Change Log has not been updated: https://help.resilio.com/hc/en-us/articles/206216855-Sync-2-x-change-log

Actually, the first attempt, on my first machine, when I clicked Install Now, did something and then the disappeared, but did not update. I clicked "Check now" and that time it worked.

I've worked in I.T. a long time and I flat out disagree with that publication. If the authentication process doesn't enforce rules like that, users will definitely create passwords like "123456789" or "aaaaaaaa" (on systems that allow such, I've seen it happen) which are much easier to brute-force hack (or even guess). For that matter, that document conflicts with itself: But above that the document states: The rationale is given here: I agree with their reasoning, but don't believe removing those rules accomplishes the goal indicated. Especially that last line - even for myself, the only thing that finally broke me of that (because I have to 100's of passwords) is using a password manager. Seems that pushing PM's and / or 2FA is much better advice than removing those rules as recommendation.

What limit are you referring to? The enforcement of numbers and punctuation marks?