Well I wouldn’t go as deep, if I didn’t get the dreaded “not enough resources” issue myself on files I ONLY HAVE INSIDE THE VAULT! So I cannot just “write it off”…
I will number my questions so that it is easier to reply even partially…
An initial question was as in the title “WebDAV vs Dokany”. But in the meantime I read “WebDAV only for up to 4GB files”, so it pretty much killed the option for me. So this limit is still valid?
Although the option is dead, I did some tests anyway. In my tests WebDAV was more relaxed with timing etc. so I could gain access to two of my folders that are not accessible with default Dokany options. But at least one, timed out again. Question is, is there a way to configure WebDAV limits like Dokany?
I found the custom parameters for Dokany, but is there any helpful documentation about the limits?
a) For example, choice between more threads or more timeout?
b) Effect on computer resources when adding more threads? What is an upper limit?
c) Timeout I can really grow it and grow it without any fear? For example I already reached 500000ms (and will probably double it for my biggest folder).
Thanks man.
For #3 I was aware of that post and the links there, but I was looking more about the practical guidelines and effect of the parameters.
I have reached 1000000ms and 30 threads on a VM that is doing transfers on a huge (45000 files) folder.
Not sure if I could get away with one or the other. The effect they have, their practical limits based on resources they need etc.
Anyway.
We added with one of the 1.5.x versions experimental support for WinFSP. After installation, go to the general preferences of Cryptomator and switch to FUSE in the Virtual Drive tab. Before unlocking a vault, please deactivate the custom mount options. Also note, that with WinFSP currently you can only mount your vault into a drive letter.
Problem is I use 1.6b1… I used that because I read about “new version vault”, so I thought I should better use the new version so that I don’t have to go through all the files again to upgrade vault version.
So now questions are:
Can I go to 1.5 with my vault being created by 1.6b1?
No. But this is not a show stopper, the 1.6.x-branch is build atop the 1.5.x branch. Bottom line: WinFSP can also be used with the current 1.6.0 alpha build.
I don’t think 1.6.0 will include WinFSP, but we aim to package it with one of the following releases.
A side remark: The migration from vaults in format 7 to format 8 is only a small one. (in contrast to the big change from format 6 to 7, which caused some turmoil)
No. WinFSP is a third party library not bundled with Cryptomator right now and must be installed manually.
My mind must have slipped somewhere else while writing the post.^^ I wanted to say, that the Cryptomator 1.6.0 installer will very likely not include WinFSP.
Well?
Not trying to push or anything, I am just trying to copy a set of folders that has a huge number of files and it has been a VERY VERY painful experience.
Using copiers that are able to cope (more or less) with timeouts etc. and still… really painful.
Restarted many times and keeping a computer on for days.
Most of your questions were already answered. But i can sum it up for you:
If you experience problems with Dokany or WebDAV, you can try WinFSP. The drawback of WinFSP is, that you cannot mount into a folder. Additionally, you need to reset the custom mount options for every vault by deselecting them.
To use it, you need to download and install WinFSP manually. Afterwards, restart Cryptomator, open the general preferences and select “FUSE” in the virtual volume tab.
The usage of WinFSP is still not offiial, but we recieved positve feedback about its performance and stability.
Follow up. Seems to work.
Folders that needed custom configuration, now work (still slowly though it seems).
Will see how it goes with moves remaining.
Preliminary tests show that this works indeed better than the other solutions.
I wonder why WinFSP support is not made official.
Hope it does, eventually.
I’ll keep updating this thread, to not mess the whole forum, with data that others may find interesting.
Speed seems to improve over time (!?)…
I haven’t tried yet to connect to the same encrypted folder from two places at the same time or using different methods.
It seems to work ok with the transfers, I have moved several thousand files (!). A single folder (which is the last I am encodings), has over 40000 files and 30000 have already been encrypted (I try to make this in chunks because it does tax the system).
Explorer seems to crash periodically during those copies (I have source and destination windows open and when I go back to check the desktop after a few hours, sometimes the windows are not there any more, so explorer crashed and recovered). This doesn’t affect my copies, as I don’t use explorer to do the copies (I use teracopy and also used copy handler).
