I hear people say that about Nextcloud often, which is part of why I haven’t bothered setting it up yet.

Is there a technical reason why it’s slow and clunky? Any problematic choices with how it was built?

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    119 months ago

    Yeah, and don’t pretend that comparable software like Google Drive, Sharepoint or Dropbox is faster.

    • Björn Tantau
      link
      fedilink
      English
      09 months ago

      I compare it to a samba or (s)ftp share. I wish it was similar in speed and ease of use.

      It’s become better since I migrated over to PostgreSQL. But it’s still not great.

        • Björn Tantau
          link
          fedilink
          English
          49 months ago

          I’d argue that the primary function of Nextcloud is to serve files. Of course the other services lack other stuff, which is why I’m still using Nextcloud. But I still wish its performance was similar to pure file servers.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            89 months ago

            I think the file server analogy isn’t really fair. Nextcloud is better compared to Microsoft 365 or Google GSuite.

            All of these offer file storage, but also much more.

            • Björn Tantau
              link
              fedilink
              English
              29 months ago

              Sure. But serving files is the core functionality of Nextcloud. You can remove every other functionality. But the files app cannot be removed.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                09 months ago

                I disagree. The extras and modularity are the core functionality. If you’re just serving files, there’s SFTP, WebDAV, etc.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        39 months ago

        PostgreSQL is definitely a boost to performance, especially if you offload the DB to a dedicated server (depending on load, can even be a cluster)

        Nevertheless, it probably has much to do with how it’s deployed and how many proxies are in front of it, and/or VPN. If you have large numbers of containers and small CPU/low memory hardware, and either running everything on one machine or have some other limitations, it’ll be slow.

        Admittedly, I’m not very familiar with the codebase, but I feel Apache isn’t improving the speed either. Not exactly sure how PHP is nowadays with concurrency and async, but generally a microservice type architecture is nice because you can add more workers/instances wherever a bottleneck emerges.

    • @TCB13
      link
      English
      -19 months ago

      Dropbox is faster.

      Dropbox is A LOT faster than NC ever was. But if you want to talk about speeds and reliability then use Synching. Add FileBrowser if you want to have a WebUI on a central “server” to access all your files and you’ll be 100x better than the garbage that NC offers.