This client is still a headache when your users have thousands of files.

[wmeneses]

This client is still a headache when your users have thousands of files.

[marcotrevisan]

The Mac OS implementation is going to change in favor of a FileProvider approach, which changes things radically but unfortunately that API is available on MacOS only.
That said, I think the root cause of this issue was the initial approach, which seems to have been more like “wrapping rsync” (good for machine-to-machine) rather than decorating a caching proxy and expose that as a “network drive” of some kind (better choice for machine-to-human).

On the good side, it also seems like much has been done to ease rough edges out.
Hopefully we’ll soon see a more minimalistic approach in syncing, where the local dataset and the impact of a change will be kept minimal and only a fraction of the folder structure is kept in sync.

One step in that direction would be having a right-click mouse action (available in virtual drive mode too) on folders and be able to remove that folder (and its contents) from sync, leaving it grayed (plus an “add” right-click action available) instead of having to do that in a config panel; that alone would drastically reduce the problems. Automate that using a lazy approach and you’re done…

[wmeneses]

Well I wish, I still defend this kind of products, but when you face so many problems you think about going back to google, you end up investing more money in infrastructure, storage to guarantee a good service.

[marcotrevisan]

This is related to #4424