1.6.1 upload ratio is no longer working it uploads forever!

[molitar]

Ok what the heck is wrong? uTorrent won't stop uploading no matter what percentage I put in it. It just seeds forever.

[Ultima]

Preferences > Queueing > When Torrent has reached the seeding goal > Limit the upload rate to: 0 kB/s

Is that how yours is set? Did you force the torrent(s) to start?

[DreadWingKnight]

Are you force starting?

Have you set a different upload rate after seeding goal has been reached?

[molitar]

No not using force start or setting a different upload rate.

[Switeck]

Tell us ALL your settings on the Queueing page.

[molitar]

Maximum Number of Torrents: 10

Maximum Number of Downloads: 8

Ratio: 20% (low for testing)

Seeding Time: Ignore

Seeding Task have higher priority: unchecked

Limit the upload rate: unchecked

[Ultima]

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?pid=237921#p237921

You need to set it as I asked you... notice how it says "[use 0 to stop torrent]"?

[Firon]

if limit the upload rate isn't checked and the value 0 written in the box, the ratio option won't work.

[Ultima]

>.>

(I'd expect checking it to be the natural course of action -- check == enabled, after all )

[Firon]

It was more re-iterating what you said.

[molitar]

Thanks.. Was this something that was changed recently? It's always worked before.. But I did a fresh install and had to set all the settings again an I don't remember having to set that one before.

[Ultima]

Nope, it hasn't been touched. You probably forgot that you set it before :\

@Firon: Understood

[Switeck]

Is your Maximum Number of Torrents set to 10 for testing too?

The Speed Guide only recommends setting it that high if you have more than 2 megabits/sec upload bandwidth.

...it might cause really slow download speeds on torrents.

[molitar]

No I do have 1MB and it handles it perfectly fine. I set my upload max to about 70% of the total bandwidth so it doesn't affect my downloads. I've hit over 500KB+ with a single torrents sometimes. Tho I did have to replace my crappy 3com router for a Linksys since 3com couldn't handle the number of connections at all without locking up. The linksys works great.

[Switeck]

1 MB = your upload?

You mean you can upload at 1 MegaBYTE per SECOND?!?!

[molitar]

No I have a 1MB upload which is around 110kb/s upload. I have my upload set to around 80kb/s. Since my primary downloads are mainly anime fansubs it doesn't take very long to get my seeding done But I don't see why others would have trouble with 10 connections because one time I had more than that going on at once when testing router capabilities.. I hit up to around 15 or 16 before I started seeing any router issues at all that caused any kind of slowdown.. but than that is over 60+ connections for upload and at that number I can see a slow down for downloads since most routers don't handle much more than 250 total connections before locking up. So ultimately it comes down to the total number of connections that affected speed.

[Switeck]

Except it's not 10 connections, it's 10 TORRENTS!

Each torrent may have 20+ connections each, so total connections might be in the low 100's.

And each upload slot you allow corresponds to 1 active upload on each torrent.

So if you set upload slots to 10 and you were running 10 torrents with at least 10 peers each, then you're trying to upload to 100 people all at the same time.

Your 80 KB/sec max upload speed gets divided 100 ways, averaging less than 1 KB/sec each.

You won't even look like 'good' dialup to people downloading from you if you do that.

Chances are, if you didn't change upload slots and originally went with the xx/1mbit upload setting, then you have them set to 6. So 80 divided by 10 divided again by 6...or 1.33 KB/sec per person. Ok, that's sorta-good for dial-up.

[molitar]

Actually I don't even seed some. I prefer to put the bandwidth on the ones needing the seeders the most. So I will look at number of seeders, number of peers.. and I will just cancel seeding ones that are doing well in favor of giving my bandwidth to a torrent that really needs the love I rather give out half my bandwidth to a single torrent and seed it for days than spread my bandwidth to torrents that don't really need the seeders. Sure sharing and seeding is fine but also sometimes a general rule does not work all the time.. I have seen a single seeder seeding and peers dropping off as soon as done and nobody else seeding.. That is where I will put my bandwidth.. instead of one that has seeders to peer ratios that are low.

So I try to seed intelligently instead of just a general rule of thumb I will have ten going on for a short time sometimes.. not often but sometimes.. and usually when I'm mainly downloading manga files that are only 5-7MB in size. I've seeded a few torrents that were hurting so badly for seeders that I seeded the file during the day at 45KB and at night while sleeping at the full upload bandwidth for over a week several times. I seed intelligently and don't follow no general rule myself.. Put the bandwidth where it is needed and not where it's not at the time.

[Switeck]

When I lower priority on a torrent, I often decrease upload slots to make up for the loss of upload speed on that torrent. This often further decreases the upload speed total for that torrent some, but the few people still downloading from me at any given moment often get a little faster download speed.

I occassionally set a torrent that just doesn't want to finish downloading due to 1 slow seeder...to 1 upload slot, 1 KB/sec upload speed max, and LOW priority. This is almost always after I've uploaded 2x the amount I've downloaded. I'm not going to finish that torrent any faster by uploading faster on it -- and even if everyone else is on 10+ mbps symmetric lines, they won't finish any faster because the lone slow seeder is the major bottleneck. I don't want someone to get false hopes on a 1+ GB anime torrent that they're going to get "great" speeds...only to have them hit 60+% like me and drop right off to nothing. If/when that torrent finishes downloading, I usually check the number of peers left (as well as seeds reported by the tracker) to decide whether I need to seed it...and if so how fast. Many times with a slow seeder and 5+ peers, ALL the peers finish the torrent within 30 minutes of one another. There's simply no one left to seed to, and other seeds are left if someone new shows up. I sometimes check back on such torrents days/weeks later just to see if they're still seeded.

I've seeded a rare series until the tracker took it offline. My ratio ended up about 40:1 and it was over 2 GB...and I don't have your bandwidth. I know what it means to sustain the good and ignore the bad...been playing the file-sharing game since 1998. :cool:

Are you aware of how packet size affects BitTorrent traffic and upload speeds?

(...and how this might cause ISPs to hate BitTorrent clients. )

If so, I'll shut up.

[molitar]

Yeah I am on the packet size.. When I was on standard cable.. 384KB up they didn't appreciate it. But when I paid for the higher bandwidth they didn't have any restrictions.. I could run an ftp server or personal web server on my setup. So paying more also gives more benefits

[Switeck]

You actually lost me.

Did you mean you had packet size restrictions when on standard cable?

If so, what kinds?

[molitar]

No with the standard cable I noticed it would tend to have slow downs quite often.. I would have to force a new ip to get my speed back up. I think with the basic service their monitoring going on to make sure you were not running servers, ect and it would slow down uploads alot.. I would go down as far as 178KB from 384KB bandwidth with a bandwidth test. I was killing my ip telephony with Vonaga when I had it.

After I paid for the higher cable service I noticed my upload remains consistant with around 900-974kb/s upload on bandwidth testing. I also noticed I was able to run ftp server and personal web server on my setup and I set my speed to 15kb/s for a test which I had it set at before with 384KB and they remained consistant at 15kb/s download while with 384KB at 15kb/s they would start around 15kb/s but end up averaging around 8-9kb/s. So definetly seemed to be some type of shaping probably to prevent over abuse of sharing or that with the slower connection.

So it definitely seemed some type of artificial shaping was going on to prevent abuse of the service with standard cable. And whenever you run any type of monitoring or shaping software it takes quite a bit of overhead but after I paid the extra $15/month for the higher bandwidth I no longer seem to have any type of monitoring or shaping being applied to my connection and I can max it out and keep it max for long periods of time without slow downs.

[Switeck]

Road Runner, especially in Florida and Texas, was notorious for trying/testing ALL kinds of anti-file-sharing measures even back around 2001. They'd probably overextended their cable trunk lines...with contention ratios of 50:1 being common. File sharing was just a big, easy target.

It might be true that the faster, more expensive connection wasn't throttled (as much!), but it could also just be the case that they started giving up on those policies due to competing broadband services coming into those areas. So it could've been partial coincidence that you got better results after 'upgrading'.

[molitar]

No not really because my nephew has the standard 7MB/384KB and he has issues still when he uses torrents. Same city.. and it's not a very big city it's a retirement community mainly. So he's noticing the same thing and talking about possibly upgrading his bandwidth. RR knows your not buying 1MB upload for nothing so pay more.. get the bandwidth.