What is the problem you are having with rclone?

I set up my own API btw and I see activity on it.

What is your rclone version (output from rclone version)

rclone v1.53.3

• os/arch: windows/amd64
• go version: go1.15.5

Which OS you are using and how many bits (eg Windows 7, 64 bit)

Windows 10 Enterprise 64 bit

Gdrive

The command you were trying to run (eg rclone copy /tmp remote:tmp)

mount --allow-other --drive-chunk-size 64M --vfs-read-chunk-size 64M gdrive_crypt: Z: --config "C:\mypath\rclone.conf"**



#### The rclone config contents with secrets removed.


[gdrive]
type = drive
client_id =removed
client_secret = removed
scope = drive
token = {"removed"}

[gdrive_crypt]
type = crypt
remote = gdrive:/Data
filename_encryption = standard
directory_name_encryption = true

Hey,

I am not quite a 'pro' user of rclone, but for my gdrive setup I used some of the VFS file caching flags to speed up things alot. You should check them out: https://rclone.org/commands/rclone_mount/#vfs-file-caching
You can set the caching mode, the max. space to use and the max. time files should be cached. This decreases GDrive API hits to a minimum, so you should have less errors and limits from Google.

Thank you very much - as I am no pro user eighter, might I ask for your part of VFS caching in your mounting command?

Edit:
I tried the following:

mount --allow-other --cache-dir "G:\Temp" --vfs-cache-mode full --no-modtime --drive-chunk-size 32M --vfs-read-chunk-size 32M gdrive_crypt: Z: --config "C:\mypath\rclone.conf"

So far no improve

hello ans welcome to the forum,

--allow-other does nothing on windows.

have you tried using the defautls all flags, removing --drive-chunk-size 64M --vfs-read-chunk-size 64M?

which tool?

upload at 50MB/s and download link is 10gbit
this is confusing, not using the same units of speed.
are you use sure about 10gbit?

what speeds do you get with downloading a large file using rclone copy gdive: c:\path\to\local\folder

The tool is a solution a friend of mine coded for myself, that is why I dont want to go into details. It is basicly simple: It grabs my file from rclone mount and reads a part of it.

I actually did not try standard flags, since those line is what I, with very little Idea, got together.

You are right, with the units, i will clarify it a bit:
I have full duplex 10gbit fiber at home, with a 10gbit router and 10gbit on hand (speedtests proof that it is not a hardware thing on my side).

The 50MB/s is what rclone browser shows me, when I upload with 1 transfer at a time.

I simply try to speed up the download, that rclone mount does, when I access files to read.

I will try now to remove the 2 flags you posted

Edit: befor I change the arguments: My speed with rclone copy are 150 MBytes/s to 160 MBytes/s

I just tested it right now with rclone browser

perhaps there is a problem with the tool.
there are many reliable and tested tools for windows.

can you post a speedtest.net?

to be clear, that rclone copy was for download?

Yes, Rclone copy was for download on the same disk. I will show you the screenshots.

I started with that command:
C:\Rclone\rclone.exe --config C:/mypath/rclone.conf copy --verbose --transfers 2 --checkers 8 --contimeout 60s --timeout 300s --retries 3 --low-level-retries 10 --stats 1s --stats-file-name-length 0 --fast-list gdrive_crypt:myfile G:\

And that is the speed, a bit slower than 5 minutes ago:

I know that it is not my tool, since if I point it to the files locally - it reads much faster.

Thank you very much for your help!

Since I can only post 1 Screenshot at a time as a new user: Here you see the speedtest:
I use my routers integrated speedtest (but it still uses speedtest,net):

sure, that is expected
but how do you know that the values returned by the tool are accurate.
what other tools have you compared it to?

Good Point on your side (please check the 2nd screenshot I posted with speedtest too).

I know it, since locally it reads at 50MB/s + on its report.
When I point it to the mount, it reads at 8ish MB/s on its report.
I cant really meassure it otherwise.
My guess was, that rclone mount does not get the files as fast as a copy command - that is why I asked if there is something for mounting that could speed it up.

I removed the 2 named arguments - but nothing changed.

I dont expect the same speed for remote than local obviously, but more than 8 MB/s should be possible now? I mean copy a file proofs that it could be faster (at least with copy).

make sure to read the docs.
did you try https://rclone.org/commands/rclone_mount/#vfs-cache-mode-full

mount --allow-other --cache-dir "G:\Temp" --vfs-cache-mode full --no-modtime --no-checksum gdrive_crypt: Z: --config "C:\mypath.config\rclone\rclone.conf"

just now and still the same.

at this point, i agree, reading from a mount at speed of 6-8 MB/s. is not normal.

--allow-other does nothing on windows.

I know I removed it. Still no change, I also tried all different kind of vfs-cache-mode but nothing changed. If I do off, it even only reads at 3-4 MB/s.

I guess you are out of ideas?

I don't get the part with the chunk sizes 100%, would it be better to set it to higher values? I mean if the speed for one chunk tiny chunk is slow, might it improve for others?

i tend to run multiple mounts to the same remote, each with optimized settings.
one mount for streaming/scanning media for jellyfin
one mount for editing small files like word documents or notepad++.
one mount if i want to net share a mount over a lan.

so it depends on what you are using the mount for.

do you have another computer you can test with, other than the windows machine?

I actually have one other windows machine where I could test.

I already had that idea and was able to mount the drive there.

But if you mean a Linux machine - no I dont have a Linux machine.

The files I read are between 50 and 100gb - but there is only a small portion of that file that will be read.
I wont share it over lan or something. I dont know if that really helps?

how are you using the mount?
for editing word documents or what?

if you are just reading small parts of a large file, then using speed tests of downloading a large file, does not seem too useful.

That is exactly what it does:
It reads small parts of big files.
Lets say its like the following: A movie file of 4 hours, my tool says "read minute 10 to 11, 145 to 146".

That is what it does. I guess one could compare it to your jellyfin mount, except that it doesnt have to read the entire mediafile in one go.