bandwidth allocation option

[Guest]

Hi, I'm currently playing with this option using high/normal/low levels between 3 torrents seedeed on different trackers. Seems to work perfectly

based on uploaded respective speeds, this option seems to follow the rule :

hig = coeff 2

normal=coeff 1.5

low = coeff 1

Did I guess right ? Or was is just a contextual deduction ?

Anywa, what I'd really like is more bandwitdh allocation levels, let's say at least five, so it could be easier to attribute different upload speeds between multiple torrents, far better & efficient choice than using different max upload speeds

Shaping bandwidth at its best soon ?

Best regards...

[ludde]

Hi!

The option probably follows something like 1 / 3 / 9, but it depends a bit on other factors as well, such as the number of peers that are currently sending etc.

This is how it works. First there's a base number x = 1.

If we're interested in the other client, multiply x by 3.

If priority is medium, multiply x by 3, if high, multiply x by 9.

If download rate >50kb/s, multiply x by 4, or if rate>25 multiply by 3, or if > 12.5kb multiply by 2.

Then "x" is used to give out bandwidth to the clients. Higher x means proportionally higher bandwidth. This could probably use some tweaking, it's something i invented in 5 minutes.

/Ludde

[Guest]

thanks for the explanation

I think this is a great feature, especialy when you have to deal with different ratio-based trackers simultaneously.

With this priorities, you can choose to push your ratio for chosen tracker(s) easily WITHOUT usual upload loss we all have using max upload speed

What I'd like to see is 5 priority levels : let's say coef 1 3 5 7 9 (lower low normal high higher)

Could it be possible to push this 5 minutes invention to a 10 minutes invention ?

thanks in advance

[Guest]

another possibility suggested by a friend ,affecting directly coefficients :

If you have one torrent A with share=3, along with four other torrents (B, C, D, E) with share values (2, 5, 1, 6) respectively, when all torrents are active, torrent A would get a maximum of 3/17 (3+2+5+1+6) of your global bandwidth, and torrent E would get 6/17 of global bandwidth. But if torrents B and E stop seeding (say, because they have no more leechers), then torrent A would get 3/9 (3+5+1) of your global bandwidth.

Does it make sense ?

[Zebra]

Just a thought!

Been using eMule a lot and therefore the question... - would a feature of automatic priority be at any help on this network?

IF you're making more steps in the Bandwidth Allocation feature (priority as I call it), maybe you could add an 'auto' as well.... that will make badly seeded torrents AND with lesser completes among peers, at a higher priority or something like that.

When thinking of it (in use by lots of users) it COULD make torrents last longer!

Anyway, just a thought.... because I think it works well on the eMule network.