Inconsequential questions about mounting

[Gremious]

The rclone example command copyparty shows sets vendor=owncloud... any particular reason why? I don't think copyparty has anything to do with owncloud? They do have a WebDAV vendor which feels more accurate.

It also mentions that "rclone is much slower" than webdaw/davfs2 - is this true? I would have though rclone would be way faster, using a newer protocol and all? At least one random dude out there benchmarked it to be faster than davfs2, but idk if that's true for copyparty specifically?

[9001]

the main reason for vendor=owncloud is so it enables useOCMtime in rclone, so files will retain their lastmodified timestamps after uploading, although canChunk might have been a cool feature to enable as well, to improve cloudflare support... would require some work on the server, so I'll make a note of that :>

as for the remark on the services page saying "you can use rclone instead, which is much slower", this is probably still true when you're transferring many small files (because davfs2 has the benefit of skipping some userspace/kernel round-trips), but rclone performance improved A LOT when it became possible to specify pacer_min_sleep=0.01ms in the rclone configs, so this may need to be benchmarked again, thx for the heads-up!

also that comparison doc is cool, think I'll spin off that and try some more combinations 👍

[Gremious]

Thank you!

[9001]

well, we can scrap the davfs2 recommendation -- rclone beats it out of the water, especially when there's a bit of latency. This is assuming you're on rclone v1.63 or later and using the pacer_min_sleep=0.01ms rclone option; if that's not the case, then you're back in the timeframe from when the docs were written and davfs2 was still the best choice heh

I'll update the docs when I have some more actual numbers, but it's looking like rclone being up to about twice as fast :>

EDIT: oh and rclone's webdav is WAY faster than ftp for small files (not surprising, given how crazy the ftp protocol is) -- ftp has a tiny advantage for big files, but it's not likely to apply in reality, so webdav's the way to go