4 ms·

Pulse is either a rebranding or a fork of Syncthing. I'm not quite sure yet. I just implemented Syncthing on a cluster of front-end web servers. I know best pr

Pulse is either a rebranding or a fork of Syncthing. I'm not quite sure yet. I just implemented Syncthing on a cluster of front-end web servers. I know best practice would be using hooks to make all my web servers update from a Git repository, but I prefer to do dev on one server and then just update one production server when I go live. Syncthing simply replicates the right directories to the rest of the front-end servers. I have 8 static asset web servers that run on low-end VPS's with just 256 megs of memory. Syncthing only consumes about 15 megs of that precious memory, leaving plenty for Nginx. Syncthing is competing with BTSync. BTSync has the disadvantage of being a closed-source product, but it's far easier to setup and configure. Syncthing will take a bit of configuration to get everything just right. It also comes as a plain binary without a native way to make it a system daemon. You have to come up with your own init.d, move config files to a shared directory, set the right permissions on that config file directory, etc. BTSync is also a lot easier when it comes to adding shared folders. With their system, you share a folder on one computer and receive a key and a secret. On other computers, you simply pick an empty folder, enter the key and secret, and then everything synchronizes. With SyncThing, you have to configure the relationship on all sides of the connection. When you start setting up a big mesh of dozens of machines, this gets very very tedious and you find yourself just picking one machine to be the "master" and pointing each machine to that one master. This has the downside of not being able to source pieces of the replication from all of the various servers.

ferongr 12y ago
One of BTSync's advantages is that it's a lot faster (since it uses "only" 128-bit keys) and (being a C++ program instead of something written in Golang, possibly also using more compact datastructures) that it consumes a lot less memory.
- ricket 12y ago
  )
finnn 12y ago
The first sentence on the page: >Syncthing is becoming Ind.ie Pulse would indicate it's a rebranding, but I see no evidence on the Syncthing side of things that this is the case
- nodata 12y ago
  The evidence is here: https://discourse.syncthing.net/t/introducing-pulse-and-ind-ie/1074 https://discourse.syncthing.net/t/introducing-pulse-and-ind-...
Nux 12y ago
I'm also using SyncThing to sync some web servers, it sort of works well, though I wish it handled conflicts and symlinks better. In my case git hooks would not have worked as each web server generates content that needs to be available on all of them afterwards. I hope they're going to do well and get it to work smoother.
teacup50 12y ago
I wonder if this is why syncthing just switched to the GPL: https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing/commit/9edce23e76c7fb66a39187aee02b12a1fd313581 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing/commit/9edce23e76c7fb... Bummer.
JeremyNT 12y ago
The recently added "introducer" feature allows you to establish trust relationships between all nodes which have access to a common repository on a node automatically. Tag your "central" server as an introducer on all of the other node configs, and they will all add each other (assuming they have any repositories in common). This really aids in this use case.

ferongr 12y ago

One of BTSync's advantages is that it's a lot faster (since it uses "only" 128-bit keys) and (being a C++ program instead of something written in Golang, possibly also using more compact datastructures) that it consumes a lot less memory.

ricket 12y ago
)

finnn 12y ago

The first sentence on the page: >Syncthing is becoming Ind.ie Pulse would indicate it's a rebranding, but I see no evidence on the Syncthing side of things that this is the case

nodata 12y ago
The evidence is here: https://discourse.syncthing.net/t/introducing-pulse-and-ind-ie/1074 https://discourse.syncthing.net/t/introducing-pulse-and-ind-...

Nux 12y ago

I'm also using SyncThing to sync some web servers, it sort of works well, though I wish it handled conflicts and symlinks better. In my case git hooks would not have worked as each web server generates content that needs to be available on all of them afterwards. I hope they're going to do well and get it to work smoother.

teacup50 12y ago

I wonder if this is why syncthing just switched to the GPL: https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing/commit/9edce23e76c7fb66a39187aee02b12a1fd313581 https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing/commit/9edce23e76c7fb... Bummer.

JeremyNT 12y ago

The recently added "introducer" feature allows you to establish trust relationships between all nodes which have access to a common repository on a node automatically. Tag your "central" server as an introducer on all of the other node configs, and they will all add each other (assuming they have any repositories in common). This really aids in this use case.