I really LOVE Ktorrent, but there is one think that bothers me: I get a lot less peers than possible, because the tracker gives only a part of the total amount of peers at one announce. Right now I have to manual announce a couple of times to get enough peers

Other bittorrent clients fix it by starting out with two anounces just 10 seconds apart, then 20, than 40, etc. till it gets to the announce time the tracker specifies. at first you'll announce faster and get more peers, and eventually you'll have enough peers and the client can just use the tracker's announce time.

Thanks in advance,
Lafie

Trackers don't like clients which do not obey their announce period, so I don't think this is a good idea.

Other bittorrent clients fix it by starting out with two anounces just 10 seconds apart, then 20, than 40, etc.

Which clients are you referring to?

I know that BitComet does it (I know, questionable client) and I think, atleast the first minute, Azureus does it too. I not too sure about uTorrent, but I do know that even uTorrent has more peers than Ktorrent automatically, so I think they have to or they use some other method to get more peers from the trackers.

I might have seen bittornado doing this as well in the past, dunno which version though. Though i guess bittornado uses "some" algorithm for it, because i think i haven't seen the re-announce being consistant

In my view, an automatic re-announce on every torrent without taking the circumstances into account, would be plain horrible because it would put extra load on a tracker anyway, whether the tracker supplies enough sources or not (bad!). Plus that every situation is different... so it's kind of careless towards trackers doing this.

If it was me i would only do this if it was really really REALLY needed, and then only with some usefull if.

alright, then only do it if the tracker did not provide more peers than the maximum set by the user AND gives a maximum amount of peers higher than the once provided.

So when I put my max to 200, and the tracker gave me 50 peers, with a max of 5000, then do a quick re-announce, because the tracker is limiting the amount of peers send.

But why do people think that more connections will get you higher speed? It's not true. (in that it would a rule for speed)
When your're in a healty swarm, 25-35 connected peers should be more than enough to get a nice download from a swarm. (in the future maybe even less peers, seeing that the world is slowly going towards a symetric bandwidth system)

In some circumstances, when you're in a non-healthy swarm, more connected peer might help you if you're lucky, BUT is this a reason to do such re-announce always? I think not, i think it would make people think we will be only caring about our own performence. (and we all know what such wave of bad thoughts can do...)
IMO people should realize that you won't need to be connected to hundereds of peers per swarm, it will make the response time on your connection weak and you ISP mad.

Connecting to more peers doesn't help directly, but it will help to find more usable peers, faster, which also means you can help to seed faster.

That's true Tomasu, and in that light it could be usefull.
But i really think that as soon as you're talking about maximizing the connection limits, one should be carefull.