Pause all transfers for xx minutes

[oliversl]

Topic: Pause all transfers for xx minutes

To ludde and other developers:

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

Hi,

It would be nice to have a feature to pause all downloads/uploads

for xx minutes.

This will help people with limited bandwidth/shared conection

pause torrents to download another file via http.

So, you can pause your bittorrent download for 85min in order to

let your http download(or users) to finish, then utorrent should

resume transfers automatically.

Also, it allow you to have a static setup in your scheduler.

Thanks!

Oliver

To the rest of the people:

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

Other topic about this feature, by SolidasRock

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=4362

More info about the feature proposal

Name

There is still no name for this feature, please fell free to post names.

Some examples: pause/resume timer, pause all temporarilly, etc

GUI

There can be a toolbar button or menu item to activate the feature.

There must be some sort of GUI to show the current status of this feature.

I can the a menu-item checkbox, a status bar icon or toolbar button icon change.

Behavior

The feature can work like this:

- if any torrent is paused: you get a dialog saying: Resume all torrents in xx minutes.

- is none torrent is paused: you get a dialog saying: Pause all torrent for xx minutes.

- if there is already a timer configured: you get a dialog displaying the current setting and an option to delete the timer.

Nice comments from Herra:

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?pid=55553#p55553

Example uses of this feature

To explain a little more about the uses of this feature, I enumerate a few. Please fell free to post how will you use this feature.

- You have limited(time) slow conection, so you download only at night. You have your scheduler configured for ut to start at 2000hs and stop at 0600hs.

You have queue like 5GB of data to download. But, one day you start to download a 100MB patch. So, at 2005hs you start the http download and configure ut to pause all torrents for 2 hs. That will allow you to have your priority patch as soon as posible

- You run ut all day long and have a slow conection, you find a nice http file to download and it will take 45min. So, you pause ut for 50min and leave home. Later, when you come back, you have your file and ut time was not wasted

- You have a slow and shared conection, ie. more than 1 computer at home/work. You run ut all day with a limited speed configured in the scheduler. Another person that uses the conection too, come to check his email and browse internet and complain about the speed. You know that that person only browse for 1hr maximum, so you configure ut to resume all torrents in 1h:20min and forget about ut or leave home/work.

Important Notes

Please note that when I talk about slow conection, I mean a 32kbps or 64kbps link. Keep in ming that real cheap broadband has not yet come to all countries in the world.

For example, in my country you can buy a 24x7 64/64kbps for 50US$ a month. So, you gotta get the juice of shuch a slow and expensive conection.

Pro and Cons of this feature, discussed

This post has a list of Pro and Cons about this feature.

Please keep in mind that I don't have any Cons about this, I put here what other users have complained about.

1. Pros:

1.1. small footprint, no bloatware in: runtime memory, exe size, cpu load, GUI

1.2. keep your configured scheduler static: you configure your scheduler only once, then, this feature can help you when need to change your scheduler only once.

1.3. the scheduler does not provide this feature: the scheduler can not help in situations where only 1 time you have to pause your downloads for 1hr30min. You will loose that 30min.

1.4. it helps slow conection/shared conection users: in slow conections with many users, limiting the bandwidth is not an option. Because in a 64kbps environment, you can only let 5 people browse the internet or have 1 instance of utorrent running. Never boths.

2. Cons:

2.1. is bloatware: no is not. It does not bloat none of: runtime memory, exe size, cpu load, GUI. Every person that think this feature will bloat your ut as hell, just wait for the webgui. I personally think that even the webgui won't bloat ut.

2.2. use an external program: some sugested to download cFoosSpeed, its a non free system driver. On slow conection, cFossSpeed does not work, you can't make 64kbps better with utorrent running and many people browsing the web at the same time.

2.3. implement a scheduler profile: this can't solve the ocacional change of the scheduler, because you will have to create a scheduler profile only for using it once in a lifetime and later deleting them.

2.4. its a lazy feature: this argument is not valid, because it depends on every user. Also, You can't start the scheduler using a time like 2030hr, 0145hr, etc. The scheduler only works from 1 hr to another. Also, it not nice to have to change your static scheduler configuration just for one ocasion, just to revert the configuration again. And do this every day of your life. "In computer programs, you don't need to work more than it is necesary"

2.5. just limit your download speed: this won't help on slow connection/shared conection environment. Because ut still sents/receive many packets/s that hurts you conection and you are hurting the torrent by only sharing 5kb/s of your bandwidth.

2.6. the result of the Utility and Cost analysis is low/negative: this is not valid if it comes from a normal user. Every user has it priorities. Your Utility and Cost analisys won't always be the same as my Utility and Cost analysis. Only the developer's Utility and Cost analysis is valid, and I will respect the developer's decision. But I will not accept one user's Utility and Cost analysis as the only valid analysis.

2.7. I don't like this feature: this is the only valid cons I have found, I respect that and I won't try to convince you that you need this feature. If you don't need this feature, thats ok.

I will keep updating this list as needed(look at the "last edited" message).

Thanks

Oliver

[static-]

I think this is a great idea. This way you wouldn't have to remember or worry about reactivating them.

[okasvi]

mmm... if there just would be small scripting language to handle things like this&seeding rules etc.

[winMX_67]

Great Idea!!

[silverfire]

mmm... if there just would be small scripting language to handle things like this&seeding rules etc.

Having to put an interpreter for a scripting language is going to bloat the program so much. Just look at mIRC. It's scripting language is extremely powerful, but as a drawback, the executable itself is 1.85MB. I'm pretty sure that nobody here would like that

[slayers]

Guys, specifying a customizable, but fixed, value is going to be a pain in the butt. If it's a quick http download, you go in and specify 5 minutes. Next time it's MS's SP3 patch (it's going to be big :-), so you go in the settings again and increase to 2 hours. Then it's a priority email you're receiving that you don't know how long it's going to take... Isn't it easier to just hit the pause button twice?

Besides, there's a unique bandwidth scheduling system that could be used to address periods of intense downloading/uploading of other programs.

What you want in hindsight is to prioritize ALL your computer's internet usage so that the email attachment upload and the VoIP call and the networked gaming session and the torrent downloads AND the http download play nicely with each other. You just can't expect uTorrent to do that. It has to be handled by a process above all the progams.

[chaosblade]

Select your torrents, click pause, go download, unpause when done. Feature Implemented. Extra code to save two clicks ? >.>

And what if your download is taking longer or finished ahead of time ?

Just do it yourself, That looks like the best solution to me because of the just mentioned reasons.

[winMX_67]

Guys, specifying a customizable, but fixed, value is going to be a pain in the butt. If it's a quick http download, you go in and specify 5 minutes. Next time it's MS's SP3 patch (it's going to be big :-), so you go in the settings again and increase to 2 hours. Then it's a priority email you're receiving that you don't know how long it's going to take... Isn't it easier to just hit the pause button twice?

I was thinking about a right click on the notification area.

So, you right click on the utorrent icon near the time, then click on the submenu "Pause for ...", then click on one of the coices: 5min, 10min, 30min, 60min, "Especify ...".

If you click on "Especify ..." a small dialog appear asking for a number of minutes to pause. This value can also be saved in the "Last used" menu item.

Yeah, I really think this should be implamented!! I dont think it would make the perogram THAT much bigger.

[1c3d0g]

Lazy feature. :/

-1.

[1c3d0g]

Lazy feature. :/

-2 for stubborness.

The scheduler is there for a reason, the Web GUI is coming soon so you can play with µTorrent all you want...do you want µTorrent to wake you up in the morning too? :|

[hofshi]

µTorrent to wake you up in the morning too

I have been having trouble in that department in the last few mornings.

+1

[1c3d0g]

LMAO... that's what I like to hear...a good sense of humour.

[SolidasRock]

Lazy feature. :/

-1.

No no no... not lazy. Forgot to reenable isnt same as too lazy to reenable the seeds. You got it?

And yes, i have Alzheimer. What i was talking about...? Erm.... :|

[aletornw]

Great feature!

[Nefarious]

still it is a lazy feature

[dAbReAkA]

that's a bloating feature.. i don't think that there would be enough people who would like utorrent to do that..

[dAbReAkA]

hah it doesn't depend on that.. 10 million people can say Yes but it all depends on ludde.. if he doesn't want to impelement it he will never do so

[1c3d0g]

Agreed. And b.t.w, anyone and everyone can comment on each and every feature request. That's why these threads are here for. You don't have to fervently defend your opinion with each and every single reply from someone who doesn't like a particular request.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

This thread? I see Oliversl (you), static-, okasvi, winMX, alternow and of course SolidasRock going for it (or a similar product). I see Silverfire, slayers, chaosblade, 1c3odog, Nefarious, dAbreAka and of course you can add me to the list of Againsts. That's 6 vs 7 as I see it. Certainly it doesn't look like an overwhelming majority one way or another.

I won't repeat everything I said about Utility and Cost. Right now, I'd say this feature is worth at most 100 bytes in uTorrent, and I don't think you can make this program fit into 100B.

When a person says "this is bloatware" and "you are lazy", what they are really doing is putting in one sentence my huge speeches on how this feature is not worth the size cost to them.

All your "example uses" can be handled by the Scheduler. You really can only set your timer approximately in any case, and if you need more precision, I think you will find a lot more support for a higher resolution scheduler.

[Switeck]

Might as well cast my vote.

I am for a temporary pauser and/or temp slower. Slowing torrents to only 1-5 KB/sec up+down is actually preferable to stopping them (which is what pause really does) because peers get angry if you ignore them for too long.

This is something that can only be used to speed up transfers in the long run.

Any leecher would just stop µTorrent when done, not seek a way to speed it up xx minutes later!

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

About the pro/agains counters, please don't count the users that only says "lazy feature/bloatware" in the forums, count real users with real needs.

Everybody, I believe, has a need for the program to kept every bit as small as possible. Every last byte that can be shaved should be.

As for your "lack of resolution" in Scheduler arguments, again:

1) In all your cases, you cannot in reality really tell exactly how much time you need, so real accuracy is impossible anyway.

2) If you are still paranoid about your DL that starts at 2030 and you think it'd end at 2130, then set 2000-2100 at All Stop and 2100-2200 at Half Speed Ahead. You should still get your DL by 2200 at the latest.

3) For your "someone else" scenarios, Pause it manually and tell them to come and put it back to speed whenever they are done. That will ensure maximum accuracy.

3) Read my previous message:

and if you need more precision, I think you will find a lot more support for a higher resolution scheduler.

... which is a much more GP idea and will thus have a larger fanbase. I will gladly agree to sacrifice a few hundred bytes (which will expand 10fold in RAM) for it, even though I never use the Scheduler because I can see the need for it with some people, unlike your idea.

Remember, pal. You aren't really stacking its usage against the whole memory bank. You are stacking it against the amount of memory before it becomes a drag. For me, that's about 10MB.

More later.

[Nefarious]

"higher resolution scheduler" i'd like that

it would make all what oliver talks about, and wouldnt be exactly much more code to add

[1c3d0g]

Exactly. I would support this, because I can understand the need for a scheduler, even though I don't use it.

[dAbReAkA]

1c3d0g QFT

[shadek]

oliversl:

The cost of implementing what you mean simply isn't worth the KiB, just as previous posters stated. I do however see a good solution to the problem in the scheduler-idea.