Test Idea:nested shares

[donquijote]

I just got an invite to the alpha, and I am already using it to sync a metric shitload of files.

My impressions are mixed, but this is not wher eI want to write them down.

I am a proffessional software testers, and I instinctively come up with various test Ideas. Because I have limited time to ACTUALLY perform this test in the near future, i thought i could at least write about it here.

My test idea is described in the attached picture. Ask for clarifications, if necessary.

<==== look at the picture now, then continue reading ===>

<LATER EDIT>

</LATER EDIT>

<LATER EDIT2>

image embedding of any kind seems to be broken on this forum. use this dropbox link:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqiqiebi25ax2cc/SyncApp%20test1.png

</LATER EDIT>

there would be a varying number of machines from each of the described three categories.

Windows path notations are used, but the test idea is not limited in terms of OS architecture.

My questions would be the following:

- how would users expect this to work?

- how do the developers expect this to work?

- has anyone tried it yet?

- does it work?

- should it work?

(the nuances of the questions are actually relevant to me, and are not written just for artistic value)

please add any commentary on the subject, other than what i posted.

[kos13]

Seems picture was not attached.

[donquijote]

I can see it to be attached, at the bottom, under Attached Thumbnails

[GreatMarko]

Unfortunately, your image attachment isn't working, so I'm not sure what your "scenario" is?

However, going off your topic title of "nested shares", I have previously extensively tested a number of scenarios in this regard, as illustrated in the attached images.

It should be noted that both of these sync setups can cause problems and should be avoided!

Scenario 1 - "cross" sync

Parent Folder A on Device A is set to sync to Sub Folder B (of parent folder A) on Device B

...and at the same time... Sub folder B on Device A is set to sync to parent folder A on Device B

Scenario 2 - "parallel" sync

Parent Folder A on Device A is set to sync to Parent Folder A on Device B

....and at the same time Sub folder B on Device A is set to sync to Sub folder B on Device B

...as I say, both of these setups can cause you problems, and should be avoided (unless you make use of .SyncIgnore to "hide" folders from SyncApp). The SyncApp team are aware of these scenarios, however, it would be quite unlikely for regular users to be setting up syncs like these (as there's no reason to do so anyway!)

Now, I don't know if this covers your particular "nested share" scenario, but if not, perhaps you could attach your image again?

[donquijote]

lol. Your attachments dont work for me either.

here is a link to it, on my dropbox

https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqiqiebi25ax2cc/SyncApp%20test1.png

[mrkvs]

Well, this is exactly what I'm missing. You see, I own 2 computers. I'd like to sync, for example, the whole directory called "PROJECTS" on them. And then, I'd really like to be able to share just one project within that directory with my colleagues. At the moment syncapp thinks it's gonna cause problems.

[GreatMarko]

Well, my attachments do appear to be working (tested on 3 different browsers on 2 different computers!)

Anyway, I can see your scenario from your drop-box link, and it would fall under the "parallel sync" scenario above. Assuming that all your indicated syncs are R/W, not just read-only, your image also doesn't take into account that your "sub1" share on Machine 2 would also replicate back to a "folder1/sub1" on Machine 1!! ....so, yes, this will cause you problems!

[mrkvs]

"sub1" share on Machine 2 would also replicate back to a "folder1/sub1" on Machine 1

Why would it? I don't mind to sync that particular "folder1/sub1" on 3 machines.

[GreatMarko]

Well, this is exactly what I'm missing. You see, I own 2 computers. I'd like to sync, for example, the whole directory called "PROJECTS" on them. And then, I'd really like to be able to share just one project within that directory with my colleagues. At the moment syncapp thinks it's gonna cause problems.

Your best option, instead of syncing your whole "PROJECTS" directory, would be to create a "Shared" sub-folder and only share that - that way, you can simply copy only those projects you wish to share with colleagues into your "shared" sub folder

[donquijote]

"sub1" share on Machine 2 would also replicate back to a "folder1/sub1" on Machine 1!! ....so, yes, this will cause you problems!

that would be intended behaviour, as far as i am concerned

in a real world scenario, i would have a giant folder shared across multiple machines, but i would also like to have a subfolder of that (for example a "music" folder) synced to, say, my work laptop.

[GreatMarko]

Why would it? I don't mind to sync that particular "folder1/sub1" on 3 machines.

You are syncing "c:\folder1" on machine 1 with "d:\share1" on Machine 2.

"d:\share1" has a sub folder, "sub1" - therefore this will replicate back and a "sub1" folder will be created and then synced on machine 1 at c:\folder1\sub1

[donquijote]

Well, my attachments do appear to be working (tested on 3 different browsers on 2 different computers!)

it seems i can see MY attachments, and you can see YOUR atttachments. Tested on multiple browsers on my own machine, with cleared caches.

[GreatMarko]

in a real world scenario, i would have a giant folder shared across multiple machines, but i would also like to have a subfolder of that (for example a "music" folder) synced to, say, my work laptop.

In which case, instead of syncing the entire parent folder, and then also setting up separate syncs for sub folders - you would need to create individual syncs on the relevant sub folders - don't also sync the parent folder - as this will cause problems!

OR....

if you really want to sync both the parent folder and sub folders separately, you would need to use .SyncIgnore on the parent folder to EXCLUDE the sub folders you're syncing separately from that parent sync:

[donquijote]

You are syncing "c:\folder1" on machine 1 with "d:\share1" on Machine 2.

"d:\share1" has a sub folder, "sub1" - therefore this will replicate back and a "sub1" folder will be created and then synced on machine 1 at c:\folder1\sub1

oh, i was not trying to imply that shouldn't be so. I just didnt want to load the image with too much data. any folder represented on the picture is intended to mean an entire part of the directory file tree....

If that would work like that, it would be exactly as i would envision it.

Any reasons why this behaviour would be a bad idea?

[donquijote]

In which case, instead of syncing the entire parent folder, and then also setting up separate syncs for sub folders - you would need to create individual syncs on the relevant sub folders - don't also sync the parent folder - as this will cause problems!

Which would increase the time needed to invest in micro-managing all those micro-shares.

[donquijote]

it would be quite unlikely for regular users to be setting up syncs like these (as there's no reason to do so anyway!)

i disagree.

I am a regular user, and i came up with this test idea, because i would like to use it that way. and my idea is a subset of the parallel sync scenario.

say machine1-type instances are my personal computers, and machine3-type instances are: my media streaming server, and a computer in my car. I would like to sync a folder with music.

machine2 type instances would serve as a "bonding agent" precisely to make sure that changes in the machine-3 type shares are reflected to the machine1-type instances, and viceversa.

there is no reason why i would want to have my vacation pictures on my media streaming box. Or in my car.

But if i start doing like you suggested with: musc folders, picture folder, various other category-based folder, like projects, and subprojects shared with various machines/people, the entire system would require careful records as to which share is synced on which machine, and i need to hire my own sysadmin to make sure everything is where i want it to be.

That being said, i am not blind to the complexity of managing this in the SyncApp, software, but i'd rather build that into the software once, than having EACH user do it BY HIMSELF for every particular situation in the world.

[GreatMarko]

donquijote, please see this modified image of your scenario showing how you could achieve your sync using .SyncIgnore:

[donquijote]

In which case, instead of syncing the entire parent folder, and then also setting up separate syncs for sub folders - you would need to create individual syncs on the relevant sub folders - don't also sync the parent folder - as this will cause problems!

OR....

if you really want to sync both the parent folder and sub folders separately, you would need to use .SyncIgnore on the parent folder to EXCLUDE the sub folders you're syncing separately from that parent sync:

oh.

This makes sense to me.

But i'd still have to keep track of what is shared where, exactly.

[mrkvs]

You are syncing "c:\folder1" on machine 1 with "d:\share1" on Machine 2.

"d:\share1" has a sub folder, "sub1" - therefore this will replicate back and a "sub1" folder will be created and then synced on machine 1 at c:\folder1\sub1

Yes! Except "c:\folder1\sub1" won't be created, since it's already there! See pic below:

[donquijote]

donquijote, please see this modified image of your scenario showing how you could achieve your sync using .SyncIgnore:

I am sorry if i don't see everything you post, because i am currently composing. I appologize in advance, and assure you that i am trying to understand the entire thread, as a whole, even if we get out-of-sync with posts.

[mrkvs]

Your best option, instead of syncing your whole "PROJECTS" directory, would be to create a "Shared" sub-folder and only share that - that way, you can simply copy only those projects you wish to share with colleagues into your "shared" sub folder

I thought SyncApp was aimed at fitting my folder structure. I can move folders around anytime, but that breaks my workflow.

[donquijote]

Yes! Except "sub1" won't be created, since it's already there! See pic below:

actually....

https://www.dropbox....at 12.05.37.png

[GreatMarko]

I thought SyncApp was aimed at fitting my folder structure. I can move folders around anytime, but that breaks my workflow.

If you "move" a folder to a different non-synced location, you will need to re-add it to SyncApp

[GreatMarko]

actually....

https://www.dropbox....at 12.05.37.png

donquijote / mrkvs - please refer to my previous image - this will show you how to achieve your sync using .SyncIgnore

[mrkvs]

actually....

https://www.dropbox....at 12.05.37.png

Well yes, from technical point of view. What I tried to show was that the sub1 folder will be synced on all 3 machines, which is what we are asking for I still can't get what kind of problems this approach will cause.