Rclone Mount --vfs-cache-mode full slower than none, why?

[ncw (Nick Craig-Wood)]

@EldonMcGuinness

Worth a try, I'll push that in and see what I get. Have not had a chance to get those clean logs yet, life being life and all just refuses to give me time to make a cup of coffee, let alone debug a server.

He he!

@EldonMcGuinness

Is there a post for this recommendation you could link?

Check out

For mount sftp,why right click on exe file is so slow until it freezes

Good tip. Thanks, but seems like my conclusion was too hasty. A more thorough test shows that both webdav and mount will read the executable to extract the icon. This will happen with or without "Show thumbnails instead of icons". Apparently Windows has some kind of (timed) icon cache that blurred my tests unless each action was performed with minimum 10 minutes delay. Why not do you think? Good question, it made me discover the above and investigate why Explorer behaves so badly whe…

@EldonMcGuinness

UPDATE: I've also noticed that if I use dd to test the read speed, the read from the mount vs the vfs is slower. Is this to be expected? I've outlined what I'm seeing below the three commands read a chunk of a file, one that has not been cached. The first one is longer due to it being not in the cache, the second is a read from the mount point after it being cached, the third is a read directly from the cache directory.

FUSE file systems are slower than normal file systems as the data has to make more trips in and out of the kernel.

The third test is likely coming straight out of the kernel cache as rclone will have just written it.

Try (as root)

sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches 

Before doing the 3rd test and that will drop the file out of the cache.

That said there is probably optimization we could be doing in rclone to make reading cached files faster!