harababurel

Thank you! I have covered this question in a different comment:

> In short, GCSF tends to be faster in several cases (listing files recursively, reading large files from Drive). The caching strategy it uses also leads to very fast reads (x4-7 improvement compared to google-drive-ocamlfuse) for files that have been cached, at the cost of using more RAM.

> On the other hand, I arrived at the conclusion that google-drive-ocamlfuse provides a better overall experience, as it already has an active community behind it. My goal with GCSF is to more or less close the gap between the two projects and reach the same level of functionality.

Not at the moment. I would like to add this feature in an upcoming version.

I haven't use OneDrive, but I think it is similar to the Backup and Sync app for Google Drive, which targets a different purpose than this project.

I haven't personally used rclone so far. I will look into it and see how it compares to GCSF.

Some unwanted behavior might occur in scenarios like the one you describe. Most probably, the change performed by one client will silently overwrite the other. If there is however a small gap between the operations, the earlier one will have a better chance of being picked up by Drive and detected by the other file system instance. In this lucky case there might be no data loss.

I would set the `sync_interval` configuration parameter to a low value to improve the chances of detecting changes as soon as they appear, but I would also try to make sure that only one client works on a certain file/directory at one time.

This case looks like a good area for future improvement. Thank you for addressing the issue!

The question is not stupid at all, but the answer is :). GCSF stands for "Google Conduce Sistem de Fișiere" -- a (bad) word-by-word Romanian translation of "Google Drive File System".

Thank you!

Not at the present moment. I plan to add support for this in the near future.