Sign in to follow this  
number3

Feedback on BTsync on a Synology DS409

Recommended Posts

I started using the BTSync just last week. Just soon after the package was released by the team from SynoCommunity. They are on top releasing your product as an easy to install product.

The package installed just fine, checking out the install code it seems it should just work fine for all Synology products, install fetches the right architecture (if available).

After installing I ran over to another synology across town to go ahead and try it... it works great. After about 20sec installing the secret it was found and started synching... before I used a complex setup using a ftp account and syncing tools. This should simplify the secure backup scheme we have had in place for the last two years ;-)

Anyway, so feedback to:

1. The synology DS409 is underpowered and memore starved (256MB) running a the Synology firmware (a debian linux system). Saying this I have noticed that because it's one code base for the sync and the gui serving it seems to be very slow.

Now I realize this could be temperary, since it needs to calculate and sync a 30GB of data storage. So it wakes a while before it syncs up.

2. The webinterface

The webinterface is showing some strange behaviours. When selecting a directory and then selecting a directory to sync. The icons get displaced. Now in the end it does select the correct directory, so its primarly "optical" GUI stuff, but it does mean the user needs to be a bit tech savvy.

3. Meaning of GUI items

Now I am ok with a little information, however I don't need it to be a live update (on a webinterface). I rather have the NAS box calculating hashes and syncing out files. I do wonder how it detects changes, or, if there is even a way to force a sync action.

4. Connected or not?

As a user I cannot find out what is going on with the connection. Is it syncing, is it in touch with the other deviced, is it... a little clue from the interface would really be usefull.

5. Keep resource use low... it seems to eat up all CPU available... not sure about memory. I see the NAS box slow down. To me this is fine, for a while, however I want BTsync to sit in the "background" and never use more then xx amount. So when I interact with the box it will be responsive, remember this is a real CPU & memory starved NAS box.

Hope to see frequent and great releases.... Looking forward to future releases.

Later

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question from all of this:-

After installing I ran over to another synology across town to go ahead and try it...

Why don't you have remote SSH set up?

Although, I'm confused with what you mean for number 3, I can't tell if you don't like the live updating of the webUI (Which, is more than likely just AJAX) or if you don't like the live syncing of files upon changes? For number four the answer is basically, "If you can see the PC in the web-UI, it's connected."

Last but not least, none of these have been an issue to me other than not understanding a few icons on the web-UI, which was my own lack of knowledge and not the program's fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why don't you have remote SSH set up?

Because it's not mine. So I had to go over and setup the btsync.

With #3 I mean the interface freezes if you have a NAS box that it memory and cpu starved. The process takes anywhere betwee 60-85MB, on a DS409 with only 256MB this is about 25% of the system memory you are eating up. When calling the webgui it just does not come back with a "full" GUI screen. Also it takes forever, I rather have a little information instead.

I don't think "ajax" style GUI is the most important (it's handy though). But on a NAS box like this you want the relevant information (its slow enough), I rather have the information once a minute, then non at all. The app needs to be responsive I guess...

Glad to hear you do not find these issues. I however do have these problems, it might just be that btsync is no very usable on a DS409 because of memory shortage and CPU lack, that's a shame IMHO since the box is only 3 years old and I bet its quite a common system out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this