Testing syncthing for a few days, and it’s such a relief after all the stress the Resilio had offered. I switched from it after it erased my data just because it felt like it…
So after exploring the release history of syncthing I thought I need to share my thought on changing the .stfolder from file to folder marker type…
As a private Cloud owner, I use S3 protocol to store data and rclone to mount it locally(Linux). This type of config (or similar) would be true for most professional cloud hosting providers…
As you may know the S3 protocols dont allow idea of empty folders, and during the remounting(and some other actions) - empty folders disappear. So as the sync stall. There are few rough work-arounds, But I want to raise attention to this issue and maybe someone could develop an option to have a choice whether to have file or folder marker type, or some other options for users with object-oriented storage types.
For the moment, you can either adjust the market name to something that exists, or create it manually as a file. There is no requirement that it be a directory.
In the not so distant future we will probably store stuff there, either just the folder ID or the ignore patterns or other stuff.
Yes, but that requires manual intervention or custom script that adds something to every empty folder etc. Not suitable for production setups. There must be a native option to my opinion.
I support your idea of storing default files there. Like temporary files, ignore, etc?.. This will also make folders look a lot more tidy, especially for heavily used syncs. But then some files must be present there regardless of user choice… for example even if no ingore rules present…
This way by the way you can also test better access to synced folder not just that folder present, but that its files are readable etc… (just folder access can give false positives in some exotic setups).
Well, Syncthing expects a normal file system for production use. Directories that mysteriously disappear isn’t part of the base assumptions, so if that’s your reality you can expect some workarounds are required.
you can also test better access to synced folder not just that folder present, but that its files are readable etc… (just folder access can give false positives in some exotic setups).
And making everything store under 1 folder is a great idea and would secure users too… with non-standard protocols and mount points.