This forum has been archived. All content is frozen. Please use KDE Discuss instead.

uTorrent is better than Ktorrent Why?

Page 4 of 4 (50 posts)

Previous • 1, 2, 3, 4

Tags: None
(comma "," separated)
k2
Registered Member
Posts
7
Karma
0

Mon Nov 06, 2006 5:29 pm
I think connecting to so many peers is not really the problem. Each peer you are connected to represents overhead, and so with my relatively slow link I tend to want few peers. With rufus or bittorrent or azureus or rtorrent, downloads proceed efficiently (in even contention torrents 50seeds, 50 leeches, or so), with only 10 or so peers.

Ktorrent often seems to have a lot of trouble achieving steady throughput with these few peers. I do not know what the issues is exactly, but it seems something could use tuning here.
imported4-meister
Registered Member
Posts
6
Karma
0

Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:21 pm
someone said it good in the posts above; kt somehow chokes on public trackers.
I guess it needs to be more aggressive on public trackers: monitor and swap peers and cache the fast seeders since pub trackers tend to have many peers and most of them are bad seeders compared to the private trackers.

One easy way here is to check the source of other clients that dont have these problems and see how they are doing things.

Cheers
pkulak
Registered Member
Posts
12
Karma
0

Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:23 pm
Ivan wrote:We plan to implement either AZ or uT version in near future. Maybe even both :)


Bah, I say, make your own ktorrent version! Make sure it's not compatible with anyone else, of course. :D
stoeptegel
Registered Member
Posts
1075
Karma
0

Thu Nov 16, 2006 5:50 pm
George wrote:I have had an idea that this could be the allowed fast feature. This feature is part of the fast extensions and allows you to tell clients that they can allways download some chunks from you, no matter if you choked them.

This has more or less disappeared from the fast extensions spec, don't know why.

It could be that some peers seeing these allowed fast packets, don't know what it is and drop the connection. In the current SVN version I have disabled this feature.

So if anybody interested can try the current SVN, to see if it still happens with this version. (Note: last weekly snapshot does not contain this change).


Damn, I forgot this topic.
I dunno how this looks to others, and the state of a torrent somewhat changes over time too... but after some period of use, it looks to me that this did something good to the process of getting a connection; both on public torrents but also as a seeder on the private torrents when there are many seeders and only a few leechers.

I hope this looks the same for other people.

pkulak wrote:Bah, I say, make your own ktorrent version! Make sure it's not compatible with anyone else, of course. :D


I don't think this will do us any good. But that again is my biased opinion.
jdong
Registered Member
Posts
358
Karma
0

Thu Nov 16, 2006 9:03 pm
stoeptegel wrote:
pkulak wrote:Bah, I say, make your own ktorrent version! Make sure it's not compatible with anyone else, of course. :D


I don't think this will do us any good. But that again is my biased opinion.


I think he meant it as a joke :)

As I look around the average swarm, Az and uT seem to be equally popular... arguably uT a bit more prevalent. Either one is well worth implementing.


The download performance has gotten a lot better since I began to complain about it with the 2.0 series. Now, 2.0.3 delivers very acceptable download performance, and 2.1svn is even better :)

Page 4 of 4 (50 posts)

Previous • 1, 2, 3, 4

Bookmarks


Who is online

Registered users: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], q.ignora, watchstar