probably millions of users

And all of the users have a read-only bucket key?

there is "no new config" or whatever. if you change bucket name you change the path

and not all people will want to change their paths to handle this limitation

is there any eta for when r2 locations will be working and there won't be limitations like this anymore ?

Well in that case, you'll have to use the slower bucket location until it can be updated or replication is launched for buckets, etc. I am still confused about your rclone/bucket implementation

it's simple... the bucket name is part of the path

so in your system it will be /bucketname/file

The local mount point for rclone doesn't matter, you can point to any directory

the only way to do that would be to run 1 rclone mount for each bucket so i can skip the /bucketname

not doing that either lol

it would make caching impossible

this isn't a simple limitation when talking about rclone. is a huge one

how long r2 has been available do you know?

Sep 2022

well almost 1 year

so i don't expect this to change any time soon

ok thanks

Sep 2021 https://blog.cloudflare.com/introducing-r2-object-storage/ open beta may 2022 https://blog.cloudflare.com/r2-open-beta/

I am still not sure, from what you've said, that all of these can be happening: 1. Over a million users are currently mounting your bucket (with a public R2 key?) 2. You are currently trying to empty and delete the bucket, so there is nothing in the bucket 3. The implementation cannot be changed at all to provide some new rclone configuration or pathname, or map between pathnames and rclone mount points

Due to 2 the bucket cannot be in use, you were about to delete it

oh by a million users i meant about others not myself. Any rclone mount user that needs to change location will be affected by path changes

that's not cool

I’ve never seen an rclone mount example which specifies the bucket name in the local path, since they all mount a specific bucket

if you have multiple buckets you won't mount with remote:bucket but just remote:

otherwise you need 1 rclone mount process for each bucket

so unless you have only 1 folder/bucket in your r2, you are not mounting with remote:bucket

Sure, but that’s not even an example on and location hints is barely 3 months old so I suspect the impact isn’t as big as you think.

If changing things downstream is painful, it seems like the answer is to just wait until bucket jurisdiction is a real feature

And deal with the slower connection until then