Joined: 4/30/2008
Posts: 89
Location: Northeast Kansas USA, GMT -06:00
The other day I was seeding and I came across a peer that was downloading one of the files I had downloaded recently, and it was quite slow (less than 5 KB/sec)! Then I checked on his BitTorrent client version, and he was using a very old version of uTorrent.
This may serve as a reminder, but if you wish to continue to receive faster seeding from other users in the swarm, UPDATE YOUR CLIENTS! It is extremely superficial that you receive the most secure, reliable, and up-to-date version available for your BitTorrent client. You may check for updates by using the menu interface.
Hmm, I don't see an update option
Perhaps you're full of crap and assume we're all the same snowflake?
Maybe you like sharing data loss bugs?
I'll agree with you though - it is extremely superficial.
Joined: 3/10/2004
Posts: 7698
Location: 🇫🇮 Finland
GuidMorrow wrote:
This may serve as a reminder, but if you wish to continue to receive faster seeding from other users in the swarm, UPDATE YOUR CLIENTS! It is extremely superficial that you receive the most secure, reliable, and up-to-date version available for your BitTorrent client.
Would you please go into more technical detail on why updating your bittorrent client would improve seeding?
(This is not a counter-argument. I'm just curious.)
All programs can have bugs, or could be more optimized (though that user GuidMorrow saw could have been downloading something else).
µTorrent wrote:
-- 2010-03-05: Version 2.0 (build 18488)
- Fix: Fixed half-open limit on Windows 7
-- 2010-02-22: Version 2.0 (build 18296)
- Fix: uTP sampling error (caused speed drops every 60 seconds)
-- 2010-01-12: Version 2.0 RC3 (build 17774)
- Change: Improve downloading/uploading performance with mixed-mode TCP and uTP
-- 2009-12-21: Version 2.0 RC2 (build 17668)
- Fix: disconnect issue with seeds
- Fix: uTP over Teredo at high speeds, and MTU problems on some kinds of networks
-- 2009-11-03: Version 2.0 Beta (build 17127)
- Fix: Accounting of halfopen https connections would cause uT to stop making new connections
- Fix: sometimes the &ip= parameter sent to trackers would be incorrect
-- 2009-09-04: Version 2.0 Beta (build 16394)
- Fix: Fix startup race condition between network and disk I/O thread
-- 2009-08-10: Version 2.0 Beta (build 16126)
- Fix: tracker requests are not invalid anymore
-- 2009-08-04: Version 2.0 Beta (build 16081)
- Fix: fixed uTP selective ack bug (would cause connections to stall and time out)
- Fix: fixed uTP fast re-send bug (would sometimes re-send packets that shouldn't be re-sent)
- Fix: uTP recovers faster after timeout
- Change: reduced uTP overhead slightly by ramping up packet sizes at lower rates
- Fix: http seeds would not reconnect after stopping and starting torrent
- Fix: http seed for multifile torrents
- Fix: uTP issue on low-latency high-throughput networks
...
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Joined: 3/9/2004
Posts: 4588
Location: In his lab studying psychology to find new ways to torture TASers and forumers
Warp wrote:
GuidMorrow wrote:
This may serve as a reminder, but if you wish to continue to receive faster seeding from other users in the swarm, UPDATE YOUR CLIENTS! It is extremely superficial that you receive the most secure, reliable, and up-to-date version available for your BitTorrent client.
Would you please go into more technical detail on why updating your bittorrent client would improve seeding?
(This is not a counter-argument. I'm just curious.)
Well, various new BitTorrent related technologies do come out from time to time. Various forms of HTTP seeds or trackerless sharing. Not to mention local network discovery and other junk.
If an old version didn't implement some of these things, but a newer version did, there's a chance for the later version to provide better sharing.
Warning: Opinions expressed by Nach or others in this post do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, or position of Nach himself on the matter(s) being discussed therein.
Perhaps you're full of crap and assume we're all the same snowflake?
Maybe you like sharing data loss bugs?
I'll agree with you though - it is extremely superficial.
