Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Large remote shares get synced by default when its size is "Pending" #6536

Closed
SamuAlfageme opened this issue May 17, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

Comments

@SamuAlfageme
Copy link
Contributor

Yet another issue explained by the mighty @cdamken. I believe it's quite related to fed. shares performance (ref. https://github.com/owncloud/enterprise/issues/2512) - but a client workaround might be also in place.

Steps to reproduce

Having the "Ask for confirmation before synchronizing folders larger than 500MB" setting enabled:

  1. Create a folder that contains large subfolders (> 500MB) on ownCloud instance "A"
  2. Sync a user on a remote instance "B"
  3. Share the folder in "A" with user@B (remote)
  4. Accept the share in the client -> size on the folder's PROPFIND might be "pending"

Expected behavior

Since individual sizes on sub-folders are available but total root size is not; the client could wait for the full remote discovery to be carried out and calculate its own "full virtual tree size" to determine whether these kind of conditions might met

Actual behavior

  • The accepted fed. share is included on the "selective sync list" by default (as designed*) and therefore:
  • The large subfolders appear on the "Confirmation area" (account's bottom part) one by one, stacking instead of getting just one confirmation for the container folder.

*: would it be interesting to introduce a new "do not sync (remote) shares by default" as we do for mounted storages? (#5340) -> rel. to #6378 cc/ @hodyroff @pmaier1

@guruz guruz added this to the 2.6.0 milestone May 30, 2018
@ogoffart ogoffart removed this from the 2.6.0 milestone Dec 4, 2018
@TheOneRing
Copy link
Member

Removed in #11517

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants