sync-ohoy Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Having a share with subfolders synced between several machines.Now one machine is full so I need to move one of the subfolders onto an external disk. I don't want any changes in the share for any of the other machines. I moved the subfolder to the external disk and symlinked back into the share. Big mistake, btsync doesn't follow symlinks so the subfolder was removed from all other machines and replaced by a (then broken) link... I've spend several hours already restoring the share from .sync and it's still a mess with all timestamps set to just now and lots of older files that already was in .sync when this huge deletion found it's way there... If I instead of symlink back to the share "mount --bind" the folder on external disk into the share will this be treated as a local folder by btsync? Not messing up the share again?I neither have time nor will to experiment risking a messup again. All machines is various linux. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatMarko Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 I neither have time nor will to experiment risking a messup again. In which case, best advice would be to avoid symlinks all together! If a disk is getting full, consider removing a folder from Sync, physically moving its contents to another disk, and then re-adding the folder in its new location back to Sync. If you're running out of space due to deleted/archived files within you .sync/archive folders, you could consider reducing the number of days that files persist in these archive folders (via the advanced sync_trash_ttl setting), or prevent files from being moved (deleted) to these folders, by unticking each folders "Store deleted files in folder archive" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sync-ohoy Posted March 15, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Thank you but your suggestions does not help much.If I could move the whole share I would.I want to keep the main project share in it's current location, it is only one project that has grown too much that I right now need to move elsewhere. Now, how does btsync handle mountpoints? And symlink is usually a quite excellent tool, it's only this particular setup with btsync that is an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harold Feit Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 Bind mounts work better and more transparently in applications than symlinks and should work better if you want to use them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wweich Posted March 15, 2015 Report Share Posted March 15, 2015 I am currently using a bind mount point and is it synced correctly.My first try did not work, but after one or two restarts of the btsync daemon it worked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sync-ohoy Posted March 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 19, 2015 Thanks. Bind mount seem to work alright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.