[–] vandreykiv 5y ago ↗ Hello, What is the benefits comparing with rclone? I think rclone can do much much more and also free and open source [–] vlovich123 5y ago ↗ Is this not free & open source? [–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Juicesync support HDFS, can copy data using multiple machines, which is game killer if you have petabytes of data.
[–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Juicesync support HDFS, can copy data using multiple machines, which is game killer if you have petabytes of data.
[–] Seirdy 5y ago ↗ This looks like a clone of rclone that supports fewer services, built by a company whose main product is a proprietary filesystem. [–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Good point.Juicesync does support less service, but has better coverage for enterprise (Rclone does much better for individuals).Btw, we are on the way to open source JuiceFS.
[–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Good point.Juicesync does support less service, but has better coverage for enterprise (Rclone does much better for individuals).Btw, we are on the way to open source JuiceFS.
[–] miniman1337 5y ago ↗ I'm wondering how this is better than rclone? [–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Juicesync is simper (fewer command line options) and faster (using multiple threads and machines) than rclone.disclaimer: worked on juicesync
[–] daviesliu 5y ago ↗ Juicesync is simper (fewer command line options) and faster (using multiple threads and machines) than rclone.disclaimer: worked on juicesync
7 comments
[ 2.0 ms ] story [ 29.5 ms ] threadJuicesync does support less service, but has better coverage for enterprise (Rclone does much better for individuals).
Btw, we are on the way to open source JuiceFS.
disclaimer: worked on juicesync