Bizarre priority handling?
Dec 13, 2009 9:54 PM
I've had this problem with Mac Vuze for a while and am finally deciding to get some help
Whenever I'm downloading a torrent with a lot of large files and I want one to download before all the others, I've found that setting the priority to "High" is next to useless. Generally it will help get the selected file to some high completion percentage, in the 80s or 90s, and then stop downloading that file so that files marked "Normal" catch up. If I really want a file to finish before the rest, I have to leave it (and maybe one or two others) as the only file downloading. This doesn't seem like a very smart way to handle priorities - if a file is marked "High" priority (especially if only one file has that priority over many), shouldn't that mean the user wants it to finish first?
Is there a way to make Vuze handle this better? If not, please count this as a suggestion for an improvement
EDIT: As an example, I currently have a torrent downloading with 20 large (~1 GB) files. I want one in particular to be done very soon, and the rest can wait a bit, so I marked that one on high. I figure with 20 files it still might take a while, so I set it to download just the important one and one other, so that once my "High" file is done there's another one still going. The "High" file is at 95% completion, and the other one was at a lower completion - about 5%. Since then, the "Normal" priority file has gained 10%, while the "High" file hasn't changed noticeably at all. This just seems silly.
One reason for that behaviour might be that the missing pieces of "normal" files are more rare than the missing pieces in "high" priority files.
Vuze's main logic is rarity: it always tries to download the most scarce pieces first. The "high" priority has secondary status in the logical chain. (So, if the missing pieces of high-priority files are too common in the swarm, they might get pushed down in the download queue.)
Re: Bizarre priority handling?
Dec 14, 2009 12:28 AM
in response to: mmore1q3
Thanks - that's helpful, and I think I understand the reasoning in that article. That doesn't change the fact, though, that even though sequential downloading may be bad for a torrent, people (myself included) tend to do it for a reason - we watch episodes in order (yes, this is a TV show.) So even though non-sequential downloading may be beneficial to the torrent, it makes the torrent a lot less useful, and it seems like Vuze should at least have the option. Does it? Or am I stuck with the choice between waiting ages and abusing the "do not download" priority?
Re: Bizarre priority handling?
Dec 14, 2009 1:03 AM
in response to: ramparts
So even though non-sequential downloading may be beneficial to the torrent, it makes the torrent a lot less useful, and it seems like Vuze should at least have the option. Does it? Or am I stuck with the choice between waiting ages and abusing the "do not download" priority?
You are stuck there. Developers have decided that there will not be such an option. (If there would be such an option and majority of users would use it, then the availability of the pieces would get skewed pretty rapidly. That would weaken the usefulness of the torrent quite much for everybody.)
( I used to rant about that, too... It is especially frustrating, if the availability count of pieces gets skewed by non-performing seeds and you are missing 1-2 pieces of some file.)