Thanks for the mention :>
Yeah, copyparty was my attempt at solving this issue - a single python-file for receiving uploads of infinitely large files, usually much faster than other alternatives (ftp, sftp, nextcloud, etc.) especially when the physical distance to the uploader is large (hairy routing).
I’m not gonna put an upload on my site, that’s a security nightmare waiting to happen.
curious to hear your specific concerns on this; maybe it’s something that’s already handled?
You may encounter some confusing errors with MergerFS; depending on your config, any software using SQLite may crash with a scary-sounding “disk I/O error”. The quickstart has more info, https://trapexit.github.io/mergerfs/quickstart/
for a selfhosted service which is a single self-contained process in a single container, is there still a benefit to using compose, and if so, what would that be? genuine question since I’m not providing a compose example for a foss service I made.
Awesome!! And thanks for mentioning the traefik thing; I added it to the example so maybe it’ll help somebody else one day :>
hey, copyparty dev here - I’ll be upfront and warn that if you’re looking for a service to do full bidirectional file syncing, with proper file tracking and versioning, then something like syncthing is a better choice. Copyparty is able to do single-direction syncing of local folders to the server pretty well (using copyparty’s u2c or rclone), but that’s about it.
But if you’re looking for something to handle file uploads faster than many alternatives, or any of the other features listed in the readme, then I’d be happy to help if you ever get stuck somewhere :>
Like others have mentioned, I wouldn’t trust the iis WebDAV server any further than I can throw it. And moreover, the WebDAV client that’s built into windows is also good for nothing – it has a filesize limit because it reads the whole file into ram, instead of using http206 like any sane server/client. And it also has a chance of crashing explorer.exe after reading a couple thousand files…
That’s why I’ve been making my own WebDAV server, but I’m also keeping track of other alternatives. And for connecting to it from windows I’m using rclone. Regardless which server you choose (just please do not use iis lol) you can borrow these examples for connecting to it :-)
I’ve been making copyparty, and one of the initial inspirations/usecases was exactly this one – bunch of internet-friends meeting in meatspace for some event, and needing to stream across pics/vids before we split up and maybe never meet again :-)
You can run the server on android using termux; see the instructions in the readme for the installation part, and then run the server like so: copyparty -e2ds --qr -v /storage/emulated/0/Pictures/from-family/::w
it will show a QR-code which you can scan from the other device to start uploading, and the folder is shared write-only (:w instead of :rw), so nobody can download anything. And it keeps track of which files have already been transferred, so the client will skip across dupes without reuploading them, and also resume interrupted uploads automatically.
Tried sending 340 photos (1.21 GiB) from an old iPhone to an android hotspot just now; I turned off the iPhone screen as soon as it started sending, and it finished in 41 seconds, so around 30 MiB/s? Maybe there are faster alternatives… But my javascript should be fairly resilient and recover from network glitches and such, so uploading from safari like this should be fine.
Not proxmox-specific, but I’ve been using btrfs on my servers and laptops for the past 6 years with zero issues. The only times it’s bugged out is due to bad hardware, and having the filesystem shouting at me to make me aware of that was fantastic.
The only place I don’t use zfs is for my nas data drives (since I want raidz2, and btrfs raid5 is hella shady) but the nas rootfs is btrfs.
I’m sorry to say it’s a bit of very old-fashioned php that’s in charge of all that xD
I’ve modified it to print its own source code if you append ?dat=sauce to the URL, and I’ll try to answer questions if I can remember how it worked :-)
oh good, that’s just reader-mode mangling the TOC. Those are supposed to be clickable links to jump to the relevant section. Firefox’s reader-mode does a better job by not rendering the TOC at all. Thanks for the scare hehe
Hey! Website author here :>
Curious about the SEO garbage you’re seeing because that’s not coming from me. Could you post an example? Are you using any shady VPN’s or anything like that?
You could always toss it in a sandbox for some isolation :> but yeah I get you, all of the optional features does mean more code.
It’s a shame that browsers make stuff like chunked uploading so tricky, so even just the essentials would be a fair bit of logic – and you won’t get optimal upload speeds without sending chunks in parallel. And the corruption detection is also worth its weight in gold… Ah well, it is what it is hehe