Opened 12 years ago
Closed 12 years ago
#1416 closed Bug (worksforme)
Something wrong with file priorities
Reported by: | spry | Owned by: | charles |
---|---|---|---|
Priority: | Normal | Milestone: | None Set |
Component: | Transmission | Version: | 1.34 |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | file priority |
Cc: |
Description
Seems that something is wrong with file priorities. Situation: Torrent with 6 files of 350megs each. 20 full seeds and 5 leechers, one of them is me. 1 file is High, 1 file is Normal, others are Low. And first, one of low downloaded first, and High and Normal somewhere in the middle. Can you check that? For some reason, these priorities are not very reliable, 50%/50% it works.
Change History (11)
comment:1 Changed 12 years ago by spry
comment:2 Changed 12 years ago by charles
spry: was the low file that got downloaded first adjacent to one of the high-priority files?
comment:3 Changed 12 years ago by spry
comment:4 Changed 12 years ago by livings124
And which of those were the ones that actually downloaded?
comment:5 Changed 12 years ago by livings124
nvm, just realized those numbers at the order
comment:6 Changed 12 years ago by spry
"#4 file-6 low" arrived first
comment:7 Changed 12 years ago by spry
file-6 means like some_archive.part6
comment:8 Changed 12 years ago by charles
so, the low-priority file that started downloading first is adjacent to a high-priority file. It's counterintuitive, but IMO there's nothing wrong with that... when you set a file to a high priority, all its BitTorrent? pieces become high priority, even if those pieces are shared by adjacent low-priority files.
comment:9 Changed 12 years ago by spry
Piece Size: 4194304 or otherwize ~4Mb, so I don't think that those 2 files have a lot of shared pieces..
comment:10 Changed 12 years ago by charles
Spry: is this still an issue in 1.41b2?
comment:11 Changed 12 years ago by livings124
- Resolution set to worksforme
- Status changed from new to closed
Without any more feedback or other users reporting this, I'm going to assume either it was a non-issue or fixed in r7242.
Oh, version r7025