How about prioritizing uploads by number of seeders?

[SDSUMarcus01]

I think a feature that would be REALLY nice would be a feature that prioritizes uploads based on the number of seeders, i.e., less seeders, higher priority.

I seed a lot of files and because I only have so much bandwidth I often stop some of them from seeding for certain periods because there are a lot of other seeders. But then after a few hours I'll come back and there will be no seeders for that file but a ton of leechers.

Maybe you can implement a feature that says if there are more than X seeders, stop seeding until the number of seeders drops below X.

[djet]

I second that. The tracker I use has a limit on the number of uploads so I have to swap them manually searching for badly seeded torrents. It would make point if this feature could be tuned not only by number of seeders, but also by number of peers, seed:peer ratio, seed:peer ratio regarding # of peers and so on.

[SDSUMarcus01]

Yah, actually I think another good idea would be being able to set the priority of the bandwidth based on intervals (and the user being able to select the interval).

I.E. From 0-1 seeders set priority high

2-3 set priority medium

4-5 set priority low

6>= stop seeding until it drops below that.

Also, when I click to sort my torrents by number of seeds, I just sorts it by the number of seeds I'm connected to. If I'm seeding files, I obviously don't connect other seeds but it would be useful to have the sort function then sort it by number of seeds. I.E. 0(1), 0(4), 1(3), 1(6), 4(2)... etc.

[tkh7819]

No, with this feature the seeders wouldn't disconnect, but have the "Bandwidth Allocation" be set to "low" automically.

I support this feature.

When I'm seeding, I usually want to pay more attention on those jobs with less or even no seeders.

And even if the feature is enabled, every seeders of that job would still upload to the others.

[Nefarious]

how about traackers that report badly how many users they have? i have various trackers that (who knows why) report having 34 seeds, when in total connected peers (infinite numbers of connections) i see 3 or 4

[Zarxrax]

PLEASE add better seeding options so I can only seed when a file has a certain number of seeds or less! I am mostly a seeder, not a leecher, and in this respect, utorrent is nearly useless! I will even donate some money if this were implemented.

[SDSUMarcus01]

I see a potential problem with this.

If everyone is using the same seeding cutoff rules, then in theory everyone would initially see lots of seeders but the seeders would all disconnect because they see enough other seeders.

Good point, then maybe it doesn't turn seeding off but just prioritizes it less like tkh7819 said. Then again, I think if you switch over to "not seeding" it should remove you from the seed list shouldn't it? If I hit stop on a torrent it removes me from the seed list on all of the trackers I've used.

[SDSUMarcus01]

how about traackers that report badly how many users they have? i have various trackers that (who knows why) report having 34 seeds, when in total connected peers (infinite numbers of connections) i see 3 or 4

Good point, I don't really see a good fix to this unless you enable/disable by tracker but that could get rough if you use a lot of trackers.

Never the less, I'd like the option of not having to manually check each day what files need seeding and which ones don't.

[SDSUMarcus01]

Any more ideas?

[Ares]

Yeah, I like some of these ideas. Prioritize by number of seeds. Stuff with no seeds go first, then stuff with one seed, two seeds, etc...

-Ares

[Nefarious]

prioritizing when no seeds is already in utorrent, in the advanced options anyway "queue.prio_no_seeds prioritizes torrents that have no seeds when seeding.", that is kind of the only one i find useful, by number of seeds > 0 is just complicating things

[Ares]

@Nefarious: I find that it doesn't always work, though... :/

-Ares

[SDSUMarcus01]

I did a little research and Azureus has a feature like this implemented (seed while < X seeds).

[HolyBastard]

Or maybe add a feature like seed while Seed/Peer ratio is over X%

[Ojec]

Yes, seed to peer ratio is more important than the total number of seeders. A torrent with 5 seeds and 6 peers should get upload-priority over a torrent with 3 seeds and 3 peers.

[myndzi]

Prioritizing torrents with no seeds only goes so far. It doesn't help torrents that have 1 seed and 8 peers, for example. I'm constantly having to correct uTorrent's choice of which torrents to seed, and the only ones I keep in my list past 1:1 are the ones I personally have created. Yet for some strange reason, uTorrent keeps a ratio on these and prioritizes the under-ratioed torrents even though technically the ratio ought to be undefined (upload: lots, download: 0). Here's hoping this thread doesn't get lost.

[z00z0]

I did a little research and Azureus has a feature like this implemented (seed while < X seeds).

Now this is the feature i like to see

And no, i won't Azureus then.

[InzZzomnia]

This is the reason why I haven't switched to µTorrent from Azureus yet. Azureus has a very functional system for ranking witch torrent to seed and the ability to set a lot of different rules to decide witch torrent to get the highest rank. And this is the one thing that I really miss in µTorrent.

If µTorrent could implement something like that I would even think of making a donation

[eyecue]

My thoughts on the matter are as follows:

While we have plenty of great suggestions put forth on how µTorrent can improve it's seeding/prioritisation 'algorithm', all of these should be pooled into a single brainstorm on paper by the developer(s), and discussed as a single 'concept' for redesign, rather than implemented or considered in an adhoc fashion. We must also keep in mind that there is no 'correct' way, and that not every single end users' whim and wish can be catered for.

peers, seeds, peer:seed, ratio, intervals, time, even possibly 'if $label/$tracker then seed forever'.

[Nefarious]

well, following some of the discussion, ratio prioritizing wouldnt be good, a 4.0 ratio on a 100mb file does make it any less important than a 1.0 ratio on a 1gb file, and i still think seed when seeders less than x, is bad unless u can be sure u are connecting to everybody in the swarm

maybe a seed priority when less than x distributed copies... but that would also depend on if u are connecting to everyone in the swarm, i have trackers that report having between 30 and 40 seeders and 100-300 peers, but when when i open the torrent cant connect to more than 40 or 50 peers in total, and that is after more than 1 hour being active, even if the tracker still report that many people

[ul]

Here's an outline of how Azureus' seeding rank works:

http://azureus.aelitis.com/wiki/index.php/ConfigQueue

(see section on Auto Starting)

Would love to see a seeding rank column in µTorrent.

[sgibbers17]

I would also like to see this implemented. The only thing that is stopping me from using azureus is the high strain that is placed on my system. I love how utorrent has made the memory usage so low, but utorrent doesnt do anything that anyother client already does. If the feature isnt built in to the client there is normaly a plug-in that adds that feature to the client. But utorrent doesnt support plug-ins.

[Ash002]

This would still be a great features so I can keep my uploads alive over long periods.

[Switeck]

This exists in uTorrent v1.8.1.

advanced settings:

queue_prio_no_seeds = true (by default)

queue_use_seed_peer_ratio = true (by default)

[Ash002]

awesome, thankyou