µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

GCRaistlin · 2011-12-13 13:41:46

rafi
Win2k3 R2 Std x86 / WD20EARS. Yes, I restarted - not just uT, server too. The issue is here.

Last edited by GCRaistlin (2011-12-13 13:42:02)

tgwaste · 2011-12-13 18:22:20

some interesting info posted by 'demonzon' regarding the RSS issue. uTorrent staff can this
be addresses and fixed?

--------------------

For some reason utorrent sends Content-Length: 0 in its GET request. lighttpd does not accept this.

For example, TPBs High Def TV Shows requests are requested (in utorrent) as this:

GET /208 HTTP/1.1
Host: rss.thepiratebay.org
User-Agent: BTWebClient/3100(26595)
Accept-Encoding: gzip
Connection: Close
Content-Length: 0

The "Content-Length: 0" is not valid in a HTTP GET request.

AdamK · 2011-12-13 18:34:53

tgwaste wrote:

some interesting info posted by 'demonzon' regarding the RSS issue. uTorrent staff can this
be addresses and fixed?
--------------------
For some reason utorrent sends Content-Length: 0 in its GET request. lighttpd does not accept this.
For example, TPBs High Def TV Shows requests are requested (in utorrent) as this:
GET /208 HTTP/1.1
Host: rss.thepiratebay.org
User-Agent: BTWebClient/3100(26595)
Accept-Encoding: gzip
Connection: Close
Content-Length: 0
The "Content-Length: 0" is not valid in a HTTP GET request.

Thanks for the info. I'll attempt to reproduce this bug, and update you tomorrow.

rafi · 2011-12-13 22:03:20

AdamK wrote:

tgwaste wrote:
some interesting info posted by 'demonzon' regarding the RSS issue. uTorrent staff can this
be addresses and fixed?
--------------------
For some reason utorrent sends Content-Length: 0 in its GET request. lighttpd does not accept this.
For example, TPBs High Def TV Shows requests are requested (in utorrent) as this:
GET /208 HTTP/1.1
Host: rss.thepiratebay.org
User-Agent: BTWebClient/3100(26595)
Accept-Encoding: gzip
Connection: Close
Content-Length: 0
The "Content-Length: 0" is not valid in a HTTP GET request.
Thanks for the info. I'll attempt to reproduce this bug, and update you tomorrow.

I wonder if this is the reason for this RSS issue here as well: http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php … 82#p624582

GCRaistlin wrote:

rafi
Win2k3 R2 Std x86 / WD20EARS. Yes, I restarted - not just uT, server too. The issue is here.

maybe uT on Win2k3 has specific issues

Zarggg · 2011-12-13 22:35:32

I haven't been really following development lately, so I was wondering if the piece checking (when using "Force Re-check") had any major changes.

I have a couple large torrents (>5GB, one is nearly a terabyte) that I only have partially downloaded (for bandwidth and disk storage reasons), and whenever I try to do a recheck on them, they cause uTorrent to become non-responsive and I sometimes have to kill the process. Does anyone know what's going on here?

Edit: I should add that the non-responsiveness does not occur in 3.0.
OS is Windows 7.

Last edited by Zarggg (2011-12-13 22:38:44)

GCRaistlin · 2011-12-13 23:30:28

rafi wrote:

maybe uT on Win2k3 has specific issues

Specific issues introduced in version 3? Version 2 works OK.

rafi · 2011-12-14 01:45:10

I suppose so

GCRaistlin · 2011-12-14 07:20:32

Then I'd like to ask developers - isn't it possible to rollback changes in working with cache? Sounds silly, yeah... But I believe such issues should have high priority in to-be-fixed list.

AdamK · 2011-12-14 12:57:19

I have verified this bug. I'm fixing it now - it will be in the next changelog.

rafi · 2011-12-14 14:00:55

AdamK wrote:

I have verified this bug. I'm fixing it now - it will be in the next changelog.

Was it really Win2K3 related ? Or something potentially common to other platforms ?

dyep · 2011-12-14 14:47:29

What is the changelog for build 26606?

MC1984 · 2011-12-14 16:38:31

No idea whats going on here, UI exploded. Even my damn taskbar. Picture of my full desktop, not counting the black boxes.

Torrent with a hundred or so vids in it, clicked stream and this. Seems like the pick a video dialogue box is bugged, reproducible but doesnt happen every time. Windows xp, ut build 26595

Firon harangued me into making this account to post this

SergoSP · 2011-12-14 17:44:35

This version will be performed x64 ?

rafi · 2011-12-14 20:46:46

dyep wrote:

What is the changelog for build 26606?

what r u talking about?

AdamK · 2011-12-14 21:09:06

GCRaistlin wrote:

Then I'd like to ask developers - isn't it possible to rollback changes in working with cache? Sounds silly, yeah... But I believe such issues should have high priority in to-be-fixed list.

Hi Raistlin,

Yes, it is definitely possible - in fact, we already rolled back some changes that caused the hashfail crashes in 26591 & 26593. We just want to understand any issues before we roll back code, and unfortunately, the disk cache subsystem is one of the harder areas to test. Not even our best testers saw the issue before it appeared in the wild.

We're going to work with you, osmosis & rafi to track the remaining issues down.

Thanks,
Adam

AdamK · 2011-12-14 21:15:17

rafi wrote:

AdamK wrote:
I have verified this bug. I'm fixing it now - it will be in the next changelog.
Was it really Win2K3 related ? Or something potentially common to other platforms ?

I'm sorry, Rafi; I was referring to http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php … 94#p625094
the "Content-Length" / RSS bug - that is the bug that is fixed.

We're not ready to tackle the (remaining) disk cache / disk overloaded issues yet.

rafi · 2011-12-14 21:33:39

Great! RSS is much more important than disk-cache ... for me... Anyways, Win2K3 is not a very common uT platform...

BTW, RSS seems to work OK in 3.01 http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php … 08#p625308

Last edited by rafi (2011-12-14 22:12:06)

dyep · 2011-12-14 21:50:08

rafi wrote:

dyep wrote:
What is the changelog for build 26606?
what r u talking about?

If you go to http://www.utorrent.com/downloads you will see that it shows December 14, 2011. Earlier today, they had build 26606 on the download page and they didn't post a changelog. And instead of them posting one they just reverted the build number back to 26595. Is it too much to ask for a changelog as soon as a new build number is up? I remember people complaining about this same exact thing months ago. Admin and staff, please get on top of things and post a changelog as soon as a new build is up for download so we don't have to ask everytime.

AdamK · 2011-12-14 22:02:00

dyep wrote:

rafi wrote:
dyep wrote:
What is the changelog for build 26606?
what r u talking about?
If you go to http://www.utorrent.com/downloads you will see that it shows December 14, 2011. Earlier today, they had build 26606 on the download page and they didn't post a changelog. And instead of them posting one they just reverted the build number back to 26595. Is it too much to ask for a changelog as soon as a new build number is up? I remember people complaining about this same exact thing months ago. Admin and staff, please get on top of things and post a changelog as soon as a new build is up for download so we don't have to ask everytime.

I think you may have seen a misplaced release for another product.
There was no 26606 for utorrent. We apologize for the inconvenience .

dyep · 2011-12-14 22:36:46

AdamK wrote:

dyep wrote:
rafi wrote:
what r u talking about?
If you go to http://www.utorrent.com/downloads you will see that it shows December 14, 2011. Earlier today, they had build 26606 on the download page and they didn't post a changelog. And instead of them posting one they just reverted the build number back to 26595. Is it too much to ask for a changelog as soon as a new build number is up? I remember people complaining about this same exact thing months ago. Admin and staff, please get on top of things and post a changelog as soon as a new build is up for download so we don't have to ask everytime.
I think you may have seen a misplaced release for another product.
There was no 26606 for utorrent. We apologize for the inconvenience .

Oh ok, was just wondering because it was up in the morning then gone when I got back to check. Thanks for clearing that up.

GCRaistlin · 2011-12-15 00:06:05

rafi wrote:

Great! RSS is much more important than disk-cache ... for me... Anyways, Win2K3 is not a very common uT platform...

I believe that's a joke. Disk cache is less important than RSS? For BitTorrent client? Great...

rafi · 2011-12-15 00:10:22

GCRaistlin wrote:

I believe that's a joke.

Yes But ... I said "for me" ... Since the cache works on Win 7 with my settings... I suggest you upgrade to Win2K8 ...

masca90020 · 2011-12-15 08:42:08

I have a dilemma. If I check the "Disable Windows caching of disk writes", my download speed does not go over 1 mb/s (I have 100 mbps). If I let it unchecked, then I have mini-hangs. What's the middle ground here ?

Also, the RSS feature is still broken. Maybe you can rollback to uT 2.2.1 RSS code. That worked fine.

rafi · 2011-12-15 08:53:31

masca90020 wrote:

What's the middle ground here ?

try 4M buffer size as in here : http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php … 60#p622260
What are "mini hangs" ? what system/HD ?

Last edited by rafi (2011-12-15 08:54:15)

masca90020 · 2011-12-15 09:24:39

It hangs when I remove a torrent or when I use right click etc. Not always, but it's annoying. The hangs usually keep 2-3 seconds. I have windows 7 ultimate x64, q9550 and 4 GB of RAM.

If it's unchecked, my download speeds are fine. But if it's unchecked, mini hangs surface.

Last edited by masca90020 (2011-12-15 09:27:26)

µTorrent Community Forums

#101 2011-12-13 13:41:46

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#102 2011-12-13 18:22:20

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#103 2011-12-13 18:34:53

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#104 2011-12-13 22:03:20

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#105 2011-12-13 22:35:32

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#106 2011-12-13 23:30:28

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#107 2011-12-14 01:45:10

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#108 2011-12-14 07:20:32

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#109 2011-12-14 12:57:19

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#110 2011-12-14 14:00:55

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#111 2011-12-14 14:47:29

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#112 2011-12-14 16:38:31

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#113 2011-12-14 17:44:35

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#114 2011-12-14 20:46:46

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#115 2011-12-14 21:09:06

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#116 2011-12-14 21:15:17

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#117 2011-12-14 21:33:39

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#118 2011-12-14 21:50:08

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#119 2011-12-14 22:02:00

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#120 2011-12-14 22:36:46

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#121 2011-12-15 00:06:05

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#122 2011-12-15 00:10:22

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#123 2011-12-15 08:42:08

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#124 2011-12-15 08:53:31

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

#125 2011-12-15 09:24:39

Re: µTorrent 3.1 stable (build 26671)

Board footer