Just installed Syncthing on my Scale server. It looks like it doesn’t have users but rather folder IDs that are then used to sync devices. One of the cool features of Nextcloud is the ability to share files with other users. Can this be done with Syncthing?
Here one crucial element that needs to be highlighted is Syncthing is decentralised by design. I mean it is different from a server-client way of thinking. It is very much like how git stores content, if you are familiar with it.
For example, let us say I have 5 devices and there is a folder I want in all my devices kept in sync. Since there is no server, to propagate updates made in one device (let us call it Source Device) to other devices, it has to happen either directly, or indirectly. Here I’m assuming all 5 devices are configured to communicate with each other directly.
Whenever one of the other 4 devices (Device 1) becomes ‘online’ at the same time as of Source Device, the sync will happen. This is the direct way. The indirect one is, let us say after the sync happened between Source Device and Device 1, the Source Device goes ‘offline’, but the Device 1 continues to be ‘online’, now if Device 2 comes online, the change will be propagated from Device 1 to Device 2.
Note that the assumption, one device configired with all other devices is not the case, propagation of change has to take a path that similar to indirect way, even if all the devices are simultaneously online.
This configuration, where each device is configured to communicate with all other, is a pain to maintain, since Syncthing is not designed like a publish-subscribe model. What people usually do is, an always-on device (usually a server) is used as one of the devices that need to be kept in sync. Again, this is not a client server model, but each device is a ‘node’, and the always-on device is also just another node.
As you already experienced, it is very easy to get sync conflicts, if a folder is shared between multiple users, because of this decentralised design. In my opinion Syncthing works best for a single user. My use cases are, syncing my notes between pc and mobile, sync files scanned with the mobile to my pc, etc.
If your case is more focused on multiple users, WebDAV server can be an option. But again it’s not straight forward and may not cover all use cases. Depending on what you are trying to achieve, a tool more suitable might be available. For example, if the aim is collaborative development there is Iroh (Still in early stages of development)
I hope this helps.
I actually do have an always on server and I was planning on using it as a client-server type system. I think that the file sharing option is complicated to implement. I tried to launch syncthing in my wifes environment on the laptop and while I get a new ID, when I register it with the server, it complains saying that there are conflicts with the IDs for the device. I wonder if its getting confused by having two IDs against the same IP
IP should not cause any issues. IDs are just a hash of certificate used by Syncthing. Can you elaborate a little on the current setup? Device, OS, User, etc. Also if possible can you explain your use case? As I mentioned, Syncthing is very specific to what it can do, so it may not be the best solution for your case.
Server is Truenas Scale. Syncthing is running as app. I and wife have it installed on Android phones. We both share a Debian 12 laptop with different logins. We both want to keep respective phone synced with laptop login. We want to have a folder shared on nas where we can exchange files.
One thing you can try out, if you haven’t done already, is configuring 2 different ports for the two users here. GUI has an option to adjust the ports, also you can configure two different services to start depending on the logged in user. I haven’t done it myself on Linux, but it looks like people had success. One R*ddit thread for example,
Syncthing on a multi user Computer
Thanks. I’ll give this a try over the weekend since it appears to have worked for others. This is something I would have expected the developers to have implemented. Multiuser computers is not that rare …