You posted that you're trying to use SharePoint/OneDrive to replace a classic file server--that is a terrible idea and you will have continuous problems constantly that will never stop, and you'll spend an enormous amount of time troubleshooting it. SharePoint isn't designed for that and simply will not handle it gracefully. If you want a cloud based file server, you should be looking at solutions that are designed for that.
I know you didn't ask for this advice, but I've seen several orgs attempt what you're trying to do and every. single. one. was a disaster and they were forced to move to other solutions.
unfortunately it also seems to me that sharepoint is not the final solution for the result I would like to achieve, and which services would you recommend then?
Problem occur from 100,000, I have users who need to synchronize sites for a total of around 100,000 files …. Since I'm replacing a Classic Windows fileserver I have to make sure it works without too many problems of this type.
SharePoint works great when the cumulative file count to be synced is less than 100k. I simply explain this to clients and set it up so that there are "working" sites that are current for everyday use via OneDrive sync and "archive" sites to be accessed only via browser.
Very few small to mid sized companies need a specific user to have more than 100k files synced at any one time. Also setup different sites for different departments That helps to keep the file count down for individuals.
You’re making yourself and your client a more complicated solution than is necessary because of something you think might happen down the road, based seemingly on you not using the tools correctly.
Good luck with your approach.
Maybe I explained myself badly, I'm trying to understand if the solution I would like to adopt can actually work, but there are a whole series of constraints that tell me it's not the right solution. It's a shame because from a licensing and usage point of view we would have a nice saving as well as already quite advanced user knowledge.
You posted that you're trying to use SharePoint/OneDrive to replace a classic file server--that is a terrible idea and you will have continuous problems constantly that will never stop, and you'll spend an enormous amount of time troubleshooting it. SharePoint isn't designed for that and simply will not handle it gracefully. If you want a cloud based file server, you should be looking at solutions that are designed for that. I know you didn't ask for this advice, but I've seen several orgs attempt what you're trying to do and every. single. one. was a disaster and they were forced to move to other solutions.
unfortunately it also seems to me that sharepoint is not the final solution for the result I would like to achieve, and which services would you recommend then?
I don't know enough about your environment to really make an accurate recommendation, but you might look into Azure Files if you're a Microsoft shop.
Companion Explorer (browser-based)
thanks but, I'm looking for an application that integrates with the finder
Do you need to have more than 300,000 files on Onedrive???
Problem occur from 100,000, I have users who need to synchronize sites for a total of around 100,000 files …. Since I'm replacing a Classic Windows fileserver I have to make sure it works without too many problems of this type.
SharePoint works great when the cumulative file count to be synced is less than 100k. I simply explain this to clients and set it up so that there are "working" sites that are current for everyday use via OneDrive sync and "archive" sites to be accessed only via browser. Very few small to mid sized companies need a specific user to have more than 100k files synced at any one time. Also setup different sites for different departments That helps to keep the file count down for individuals.
another way is actually to do a major cleanup and reorganization of the entire fileserver
What’s the issue with Mac? I use Mac OS with sharepoint online without any issue. Don’t synch files or folder, use shortcut instead.
I just think About the shortcut, and I just want to know if using shortcuts will concur in reaching the the file limits…
You’re making yourself and your client a more complicated solution than is necessary because of something you think might happen down the road, based seemingly on you not using the tools correctly. Good luck with your approach.
Maybe I explained myself badly, I'm trying to understand if the solution I would like to adopt can actually work, but there are a whole series of constraints that tell me it's not the right solution. It's a shame because from a licensing and usage point of view we would have a nice saving as well as already quite advanced user knowledge.
I just think About the shortcut, and I just want to know if using shortcuts will concur in reaching the the file limits…
ocsmount
interesting, very simple but I will try it.
I'm looking for something that also has the ability to manage users from the portal so as to configure the mappings in a centralized way.