Layout 1 will get more complicated as you scale, especially if you have more than one share that is not shared with the same devices. If you have conflicts or sync issues, it can be a nightmare to isolate.
You might consider Layout 1, but without the sync link between clients. Or, just sync link servers and then sync link client to its “home” / Primary server
Thank you for this I’ve completely taken your comment on board and wonder if this revised scheme is practical for my use case - I’ve re-arranged the diagram to make it clearer (to my self mostly!).
99% of the changes I make to files occur on PC1, so I thought it might make sense to make that top tier. Then files sync to Server 1 that’s always on. If I’m having a productive day, I tend to turn Server 2 on, so that in the event of a complete failure of Server 2, I would only have lost 30mins of work. I could then keep working and sort out the failed Server when able.
It may be worth knowing that both Server 1 & Server 2 consist of a mirrored pair of drives, the only difference between them is that every few hours, Server 1 is also backed-up with BackBlaze.
There is also a Server 4 (also mirrored pair) that I turn on every weekend and that receives the syncthing folders in snapshot replication form.
This may seem overkill, but I hate re-doing work, if I spent 1 day working, then lost it all, I would be incredibly annoyed with myself when the next day is spent re-doing the work at no additional income!
Personally, I’d never want to rely on a single device as the point of failure (which is “Server 1” in your case as the only connection between “PC 1” and “Laptop 1”. You don’t need to connect with one another absolutely everything, but I always like to have at least 2 points of failure.
In general, I like to connect all desktop PCs located in the same location with each other. When it comes to mobile devices, I like to to connect them with selected desktop devices only, mainly to save battery. The case is similar with low-end devices and/or devices located on slow networks, as they simply can’t keep up with managing too many connections.
I forgot to add one important thing which is that we like to keep all devices turned on and running 24/7. This way you can always be sure that the files are in their newest iteration as soon as sit at the computer which also reduces the risk of potential conflicts. Yes, it does use more energy, but the desktop computers are all quite low power, using only 20-30 watts when idle, so it’s not a big deal for us.
Thank you again matey I totally agree, computers consume very little power and my “always on” server is a low power unit (30w). In this situation though, I’m working from home and am the only ST user (for now!), I’m also the bill payer So I do turn machines off when not in use, but also 99% of file changes happen on PC1. Hopefully this method doesn’t wreck the sync’ing of my files!