Firon Posted February 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 All but 2 were from public trackers. The ones that got 0 hash fails were public torrents, funnily enough.And um, I get stuff from public trackers all the time, I don't have any issues with 'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rafi Posted February 21, 2006 Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 no issues, ha ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted February 21, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 21, 2006 8801.625: 67.164.57.47 : [Azureus/2400 ]: Disconnect: Invalid packet length9282.750: 67.164.57.47 : [Azureus/2400 ]: Disconnect: Invalid packet length9538.484: 67.164.57.47 : [Azureus/2400 ]: Disconnect: Invalid packet length9701.656: 67.164.57.47 : [Azureus/2400 ]: Disconnect: Invalid packet length9779.984: Banned 67.164.57.47Each time there was invalid packet length, bam, hashfail. It may be a bug with Az 2.4.0.0, but since there were no µT clients in the swarm, I can't tell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technarch Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Tonight I shut off VPN (PPTP, IPSec) in the router.Headed to the OpenOffice torrent to test.. it downloaded as fast as it could, so fast in fact when uncapped the crap router lost connection. no hash fails.. yay.So I'll keep my fingers crossed that it was mostly a router issue. Hopefully. I'll know over time, but so far a good sign.Btw, I don't know if this is a bug or just the nature of the protocol, but in my settings I have dl speed capped at 285 I think, but it was going at 333. When I uncapped it, it went a bit higher to 346 or so. Still, shouldn't the dl rate have remained lower around the 285 mark? It does great with the ul rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted February 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 It's quite difficult to cap the download rate accurately apparently. I've seen every program (even standard HTTP programs) have issues with getting it normal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Odd... I was playing with the download limiter today when downloading two different versions of OpenOffice.org too (when I was testing the columns for ascending/descending inconsistencies), and it was working just fine (FYI, I limited to 15KB/s for both torrents). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I'm currently using build 426 and I'm downloading a 7,82 GB torrent with 2 MB peice sizes andI have only got 1 hashfail and I have downloaded 91,7% of the torrent where half of the peersI'm connected to are Azureus 2.4.0.0.What could be the problem Azureus 2.4.0.0, is that maybe µTorrent isn't compatible with oneof Azureus encryption levels or that there is a bug with one of Azureus encryption levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boo Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Maybe you should have waited for Firon to make it official Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted February 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 It's not public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Technarch Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Bug?:That's weird.. I just now looked at the log and there's a single hash fail on a queued item I haven't even started yet. In fact the 2 queued items have actually downloaded a couple megs each! How is that possible?On hash failing:So far so good.. since I twiddled around making sure my MTU was hardcoded to the same value as the router (1500), hardcoded a RWIN to a better value (32767) and turned off dmz gaming mode, upnp, ip multicasting, and VPN options, stuff seems better..I am still getting the single isolated hash fail on a piece sporadically but it doesn't repeat itself. This is 'normal' behavior.Of course I'm on different torrents now.. so we'll likely never know which end was the problem.. but I think 'for now' I am ok.Still, that thing Firon spotted about the invalid packet length makes me wonder if all that torture I was going through was because of an Az client. I wonder if Az knows about it.Btw guys, I don't think it's encryption.. these problems happen with or without it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geezer Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I have bad news....All torrents which I downloaded with recent beta versions of µTorrent *prior* to 427 fail a "force re-check". Since I was still seeding these with 427 it means that ***I*** have been the source of hash fails for other peers downloading these torrents.So...................this means everyone (EVERYONE) who has been using any beta version of µTorrent prior to 427 MUST stop all their torrents and do a force recheck on every one of them or you will continue to "poison" the torrents you are seeding (or still downloading...see next paragraph).This also applies to any extremely slow torrents you initially started downloading with a previous beta version and are still downloading with 427. I had one of those too and its "done" percentage was reduced when I did a "force re-check" on it.This is why there have been several previous posts (from Firon and Boo, I believe) recommending that everyone stop and "force re-check" all their torrents. I think the problem has been known for a while now but no one has fully explained it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAbReAkA Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 i don't think that's true.. i checked all my recent torrents (the one i added the last week) and they all passed the hashcheck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hofshi Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 I checked all my torrents and all of them passed the hashcheck. on a torrent I'm downloading I only have 1 hash fail after 600MB downloaded (2MB piece size).I'm using the latest public beta, didn't try the latest beta yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nefarious Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Banned 0.0.0.0how did 0.0.0.0 get in my peer list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhn195 Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 argggghhhh.... i had 42 hashfails within 16 hours out of a 4GB torrent. Can't be poisoned as i noticed a lot of hashfail from all the torrent since the last few betas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rseiler Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Does anyone know what the "piece cache" in Statistics is supposed to mean and why it's always so low (e.g. 10%)? I'd love to see separate overall read/write caching statistics implemented, which I don't think this is (at least I hope not). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDude Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 If the news media posted a headline "Invasion of small black spiders !" , then you can bet that suddenly everyone would notice small black spiders in their house that they previously had not noticed. The same thing applies to hash fails and corrupted files. I had all of those things with 1.2 and 1.3 and ABC as well.Just because one person has corrupted files doesn't mean the program is flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoicJester Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 @nefariousi think it might be default Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firon Posted February 22, 2006 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 <Nolar> i believe it's been fixed in cvsSo, it was Azureus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadek Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 No hashfail issues with build 428, 0.15% failed. I believe that's normal. 5 of the hashfails were from one peer that got banned: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Thanks for the heads up on the new build ;P--- 2006-02-21: Version 1.4.2-beta (build 428)- Change: Smarter block hashing, tries to avoid re-reading from the file if possible.- Change: Tracker connections obey max_halfopen/max_connections- Change: Switching folder in the Add window tries to detect if you point at an already downloaded folder.- Feature: Added log-to-file option in logger.- Change: Added support for " in XML parser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhn195 Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 build 428 doesn't look too me to me either, 10 hashfail within the hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultima Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 Lookie at Firon's post just above... An Azureus dev fixed the problem in CVS, so it was actually Azureus sending bad pieces, not µTorrent corrupting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAbReAkA Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 i'm glad to hear that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
µtorrent-User Posted February 22, 2006 Report Share Posted February 22, 2006 It's not public.What are the reasons that 428 is not public? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.