Official eMule-Board: Feature: Zz Slotfocus - Official eMule-Board

Jump to content


  • (7 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

Feature: Zz Slotfocus Faster completion of chunks during UL

#81 User is offline   CiccioBastardo 

  • Doomsday Executor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Italian Moderators
  • Posts: 5541
  • Joined: 22-November 03

Posted 08 August 2006 - 12:00 PM

I think this request is as old as the push small file one...
The problem is not the client, it's the user
0

#82 User is offline   MadlyMad 

  • Golden eMule
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3745
  • Joined: 29-October 02

Posted 08 August 2006 - 12:34 PM

yep

unfortunately I don't think they will add this feature, official devs from the Top prefer to have X slots to an approximately same speed each other, to be more "fair" to everybody
which I respect too
even if I'd prefer this to be implemented

;)

The extreme limit of wisdom, that is what the public calls madness.
0

#83 User is offline   gigatoaster 

  • Shpongle is my life
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 7411
  • Joined: 13-December 03

Posted 08 August 2006 - 12:51 PM

Year but we have to adapt to our new connections, more and more people are uploading @60 even 120... Slotfocus will only improve the whole network speed.. 22 opened slots now, it could be 10 or least...I hope devs will have a look at it ^_^

#84 User is offline   white lightning 

  • Golden eMule
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1311
  • Joined: 18-April 06

Posted 08 August 2006 - 10:37 PM

If the problem is too many slots opened , it should be sufficient that they remove the 3 Kb/s limit per slot .

:respect:
rEally lOve eMule & tHis fOrum
0

#85 User is offline   CiccioBastardo 

  • Doomsday Executor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Italian Moderators
  • Posts: 5541
  • Joined: 22-November 03

Posted 08 August 2006 - 10:41 PM

And set the new limit at...?
The problem is not the client, it's the user
0

#86 User is offline   white lightning 

  • Golden eMule
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1311
  • Joined: 18-April 06

Posted 08 August 2006 - 10:56 PM

....don't know... :(
rEally lOve eMule & tHis fOrum
0

#87 User is offline   Dmnyanks 

  • Post Captain
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 349
  • Joined: 04-December 03

Posted 10 August 2006 - 12:59 PM

Any solution shouldn't include trickle slots, even with the faster end-game feature going from 200kb/s to 0.1kb/s, is really annoying. Especially, when it takes longer to finish the last 180kb chunk than all the rest of the file.
What happens if a big asteroid hits Earth?
Judging from realistic simulations involving a sledge hammer and a common laboratory frog, we can assume it will be pretty bad.
0

#88 User is offline   zz 

  • -
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Debugger
  • Posts: 2014
  • Joined: 30-November 02

Posted 10 August 2006 - 01:16 PM

The devs don't want SlotFocus in the official eMule, so it will probably never be included.

/zz B)
ZZUL - get control of your uploads: ZZUL Forum
0

#89 User is offline   Syst3m Crash3r 480 

  • Magnificent Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 380
  • Joined: 30-April 06

Posted 11 August 2006 - 09:55 AM

View Postzz, on Aug 10 2006, 03:16 PM, said:

The devs don't want SlotFocus in the official eMule, so it will probably never be included.

/zz B)


Why? :confused:


0

#90 User is offline   gigatoaster 

  • Shpongle is my life
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 7411
  • Joined: 13-December 03

Posted 12 August 2006 - 02:36 PM

Ok, thanks for the answer. ;)

Is there any reason why they don't want it? :unsure:

#91 User is offline   tHeWiZaRdOfDoS 

  • Man, what a bunch of jokers...
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5630
  • Joined: 28-December 02

Posted 12 August 2006 - 03:31 PM

I guess ppl would already be relieved if they finally got a version that uploads to fewer clients simultaneously (one could e.g. "ensure" ~5kB per client and spread the remains, so noone gets into that trickle position)
0

#92 User is offline   gigatoaster 

  • Shpongle is my life
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 7411
  • Joined: 13-December 03

Posted 12 August 2006 - 03:41 PM

I feel it too ^_^, with official client I've got "only" 17 slots with a UP @ 80 KB/s whereas with slot focus from Morph or Neo mule, I've managed to open 5 slots.

I can't see the reason why it could not be implemented, might it harm the network? :unsure:

#93 User is offline   CiccioBastardo 

  • Doomsday Executor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Italian Moderators
  • Posts: 5541
  • Joined: 22-November 03

Posted 12 August 2006 - 09:33 PM

Quote

might it harm the network?

Absolutely not, unless you consider the trickle slots an harm.

However, I think there's be tons of people coming and complaining about the fact that they upload to less people and that their friend slot is sucking up completely their up bandwidth.
The problem is not the client, it's the user
0

#94 User is offline   Syst3m Crash3r 480 

  • Magnificent Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 380
  • Joined: 30-April 06

Posted 21 August 2006 - 06:03 PM

View Postgigatoaster, on Aug 12 2006, 05:41 PM, said:

I can't see the reason why it could not be implemented, might it harm the network? :unsure:


If you read zz's explanation written in the first post of this thread, you'll see the reason to say that it improves overall network performances. :)


0

#95 User is offline   gigatoaster 

  • Shpongle is my life
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 7411
  • Joined: 13-December 03

Posted 03 September 2006 - 10:37 AM

I did, indeed, that's why i don't understand the possible reason why devs have refused slotfocus. :P

#96 User is offline   netfinity 

  • Master of WARP
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1658
  • Joined: 23-April 04

Posted 03 September 2006 - 12:28 PM

I don't think slot focus makes part to spread faster as the waiting time until you actually get the slot increases with slot focus enabled, so the total download time to get one part is constant.

Also, the upload complete parts as fast as possible philosophy appears to be very centric around a single upload/download session like if it where an FTP transaction. But, the ed2k network is designed with the idea that a client should download from multiple sources at the same time where an other source take over as soon as an other leave. I think it is more effective to use dynamic session lenghts promoting less common parts if you want to increase the availability of parts.

Also, I hate trickle slot running at speeds below 1 kB/s as they look very suspicously alike **AA bots or some evil leecher client that tries to lock a slot for along time for it's own vicious purpose. I have actually thought of banning clients that upload/download to slowly as I can't find any senseful reason for them to do that.

/netfinity
eMule v0.50a [NetF WARP v0.3a]
- Compiled for 32 and 64 bit Windows versions
- Optimized for fast (100Mbit/s) Internet connections
- Faster file completion via Dynamic Block Requests and dropping of stalling sources
- Faster searching via KAD with equal or reduced overhead
- Less GUI lockups through multi-threaded disk IO operations
- VIP "Payback" queue
- Fakealyzer (helps you chosing the right files)
- Quality Of Service to keep eMule from disturbing VoIP and other important applications (Vista/7/8 only!)
0

#97 User is offline   leuk_he 

  • MorphXT team.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5975
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 03 September 2006 - 12:39 PM

View Postnetfinity, on Sep 3 2006, 02:28 PM, said:

I don't think slot focus makes part to spread faster as the waiting time until you actually get the slot increases with slot focus enabled, so the total download time to get one part is constant.

The same reasoning could be applied to smaller chunks. the total downlaod time for the file is the the same.
Download the MorphXT emule mod here: eMule Morph mod

Trouble connecting to a server? Use kad and /or refresh your server list
Strange search results? Check for fake servers! Or download morph, enable obfuscated server required, and far less fake server seen.

Looking for morphXT translators. If you want to translate the morph strings please come here (you only need to be able to write, no coding required. ) Covered now: cn,pt(br),it,es_t,fr.,pl Update needed:de,nl
-Morph FAQ [English wiki]--Het grote emule topic deel 13 [Nederlands]
if you want to send a message i will tell you to open op a topic in the forum. Other forum lurkers might be helped as well.
0

#98 User is offline   gigatoaster 

  • Shpongle is my life
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Moderator
  • Posts: 7411
  • Joined: 13-December 03

Posted 03 September 2006 - 12:54 PM

Quote

as the waiting time until you actually get the slot increases with slot focus enabled, so the total download time to get one part is constant.


Good point. ;) In the mean time, the other chunks are spread faster to other people so I thought that the whole DL speed would increase. :confused:

Quote

like if it where an FTP transaction


Yes, you're right.

So to you, slotfocus is not effective, you're talking about dynamic session lenghts, what is that?

Me too, I hate trickle slot, I would let them in the waiting queue, but I am not sure if it is possible and of course it is unethical (but...).

What would you suggest to handle bigger connection (ie upload at 100 kB/sec or much more, I've seen you at 800 :woot: ) :a kind of rewrited slotfocus or the basic stuff of vanilia mule?

#99 User is offline   CiccioBastardo 

  • Doomsday Executor
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Italian Moderators
  • Posts: 5541
  • Joined: 22-November 03

Posted 03 September 2006 - 01:14 PM

View Postnetfinity, on Sep 3 2006, 02:28 PM, said:

Also, I hate trickle slot running at speeds below 1 kB/s as they look very suspicously alike **AA bots or some evil leecher client that tries to lock a slot for along time for it's own vicious purpose. I have actually thought of banning clients that upload/download to slowly as I can't find any senseful reason for them to do that.

A real trickle slot should not last more than few minutes, the time to finish uploading 1 or 2 chunks to the clients with higher priority. However, I have never seen them as a negative factor. I consider whatever comes in my computer as a good thing. For corrupting bots, the AICH and CBB should be enough to get rid of them.
Slotfocus helps a lot when releasing a new file. During that period, the faster the chunk spreading the faster the number of source increase. And being an exponential function, you see that every single bit helps greatly boosting the release performance. During the release of new files, the spreading of the other files is unimportant (that's why PowerShare has been created), and slotfocus gives its maximum benefits.

Think about this simple example: spreading a 20 chunk file with an upload speed of 60KB/s, supposing there's a number of clients wanting that file. See what changes with slotfocus enabled and disabled.
The problem is not the client, it's the user
0

#100 User is offline   netfinity 

  • Master of WARP
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1658
  • Joined: 23-April 04

Posted 03 September 2006 - 02:06 PM

My reason for why I think slotfocus has no effect!

Download of part without slotfocus
| Waiting time....... | Download...... |
Download of part with slotfocus
| Waiting time............. | Download |
EDIT: added dots to make bars different length

As you see the waiting is done before the download and therefore the part completes at the same moment independant of slotfocus. The only case where parts would spread faster is when you use slotfocus in combination with a push rare parts feature, but using slotfocus alone is in my eyes useless.

View Postgigatoaster, on Sep 3 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

So to you, slotfocus is not effective, you're talking about dynamic session lenghts, what is that?
Not uploading full chunks to every client, but only to those requesting the rare parts. Thus rare parts will be available faster as the waiting times can be cut shorter.

View Postgigatoaster, on Sep 3 2006, 02:54 PM, said:

What would you suggest to handle bigger connection (ie upload at 100 kB/sec or much more, I've seen you at 800 :woot: ) :a kind of rewrited slotfocus or the basic stuff of vanilia mule?
Allow higher upload speeds per slot, so that not so many slots need to be opened. If someone like to use slotfocus on a such connection I think they should use a trickle rate of 3kB/s as algorithms like DBR isn't working very well with sources slower than that.

I don't dislike slotfocus, but I don't like trickle slots at very low datarates as they causes disturbances in the download that make parts taking longer time to complete and therefore also causing extra overhead. Now, some say that you will get full speed after a while but reality shows that a lot of clients cut you off instead and with these insanly low datarates it's hard to tell what sources are the good ones.

This post has been edited by netfinity: 03 September 2006 - 02:11 PM

eMule v0.50a [NetF WARP v0.3a]
- Compiled for 32 and 64 bit Windows versions
- Optimized for fast (100Mbit/s) Internet connections
- Faster file completion via Dynamic Block Requests and dropping of stalling sources
- Faster searching via KAD with equal or reduced overhead
- Less GUI lockups through multi-threaded disk IO operations
- VIP "Payback" queue
- Fakealyzer (helps you chosing the right files)
- Quality Of Service to keep eMule from disturbing VoIP and other important applications (Vista/7/8 only!)
0

  • Member Options

  • (7 Pages)
  • +
  • « First
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users