3 ms·

It uses inotify, so "scanning" for changes more frequently should have only a minimal impact on performance. Of course if you have a lot of actively changing fi

It uses inotify, so "scanning" for changes more frequently should have only a minimal impact on performance. Of course if you have a lot of actively changing files, you don't want it spending a lot of time transferring files that are still in the process of being modified, so reducing the frequency might help. I've never noticed performance issues with syncthing, excepting my old original Nexus 7 tablet which does seem to suffer a bit due to its poor hardware. I keep my photos volume (~250GB) synchronized between three desktop systems and it's never presented a problem with those. Given that the grandparent mentions issues with larger volumes, there may be some sort of "tipping point" beyond which performance degrades, and I just have not encountered it. Regardless I'd encourage people to give Syncthing a try. The project is under very active development and the issue the grandparent mentions may be resovled by now, and of course that issue might be environment specific and not generally applicable.

pedrocr 11y ago
> It uses inotify Actually it doesn't. There are some add-ons to do it but the base tool does periodic full scans. > I've never noticed performance issues with syncthing, excepting my old original Nexus 7 tablet which does seem to suffer a bit due to its poor hardware. I keep my photos volume (~250GB) synchronized between three desktop systems and it's never presented a problem with those. 250GB between desktops with multiple GB of RAM probably works. It will soak up plenty of resources though. >Regardless I'd encourage people to give Syncthing a try. The project is under very active development and the issue the grandparent mentions may be resovled by now, and of course that issue might be environment specific and not generally applicable. The issue is pervasive and apparently quite deeply rooted in the way syncthing is built as it's indeed under very active development but this hasn't improved.
- JeremyNT 11y ago
  Thank you for the correction re: inotify, I did not mean to mislead people. Sadly I can no longer edit the incorrect information in my original comment.

pedrocr 11y ago

> It uses inotify Actually it doesn't. There are some add-ons to do it but the base tool does periodic full scans. > I've never noticed performance issues with syncthing, excepting my old original Nexus 7 tablet which does seem to suffer a bit due to its poor hardware. I keep my photos volume (~250GB) synchronized between three desktop systems and it's never presented a problem with those. 250GB between desktops with multiple GB of RAM probably works. It will soak up plenty of resources though. >Regardless I'd encourage people to give Syncthing a try. The project is under very active development and the issue the grandparent mentions may be resovled by now, and of course that issue might be environment specific and not generally applicable. The issue is pervasive and apparently quite deeply rooted in the way syncthing is built as it's indeed under very active development but this hasn't improved.

JeremyNT 11y ago
Thank you for the correction re: inotify, I did not mean to mislead people. Sadly I can no longer edit the incorrect information in my original comment.