Analyzzul Mod ZZUL & Client Analyzer ... very, very bad code :)
#121
Posted 23 March 2009 - 12:20 PM
Currently it actually appends...
- feel the lightweight! - featuring Snarl support, the Client Analyzer and tits!
Coded by a Golden eMule Award winner and most people's favorite modder!
..........................................
Music, not muzak:
Progressive Rock :: my last.fm profile
..........................................
eMule user since 0.28 ...
-[ ... and thanks for all the fish! ]-
#122
Posted 23 March 2009 - 02:39 PM
Tuxman, on Mar 23 2009, 02:20 PM, said:
8 is is more than 18? I must have not listened in math class or what I have been taught was all wrong.
I am quite sure this info shows the other client DL/UL, not mine.
Tuxman, on Mar 23 2009, 02:20 PM, said:
Then why is it blank?
#123
Posted 23 March 2009 - 03:31 PM
- feel the lightweight! - featuring Snarl support, the Client Analyzer and tits!
Coded by a Golden eMule Award winner and most people's favorite modder!
..........................................
Music, not muzak:
Progressive Rock :: my last.fm profile
..........................................
eMule user since 0.28 ...
-[ ... and thanks for all the fish! ]-
#124
Posted 23 March 2009 - 03:55 PM
#125
Posted 23 March 2009 - 04:03 PM
I would have to look into the src for further investigations...
- feel the lightweight! - featuring Snarl support, the Client Analyzer and tits!
Coded by a Golden eMule Award winner and most people's favorite modder!
..........................................
Music, not muzak:
Progressive Rock :: my last.fm profile
..........................................
eMule user since 0.28 ...
-[ ... and thanks for all the fish! ]-
#126
Posted 23 March 2009 - 04:27 PM
#127
Posted 23 March 2009 - 05:23 PM
tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on Mar 23 2009, 06:27 PM, said:
Of course, that's common, but not when it's upload is greater than it's download, and there's no other reason.
But I think it should be realy left to the CS. Make it regressive (progressive?) maybe.
Also there are a lot of clients that let you download 2 megs that's enough to give them a score of 2. With enough sources that's all they need before they will be identifyed as leechers. So maybe activatine CS after a client uploads a full chunk is not a bad idea either.
This post has been edited by Chike: 23 March 2009 - 05:24 PM
#128
Posted 23 March 2009 - 05:56 PM
In this example the remote client actually downloaded 18 MB off you and gave only 8 MB back so the UL/DL ratio comment is correct here (though I may be wrong, I didn't look into the official code for some time so I stand to be corrected).
Also, the UL/DL amounts are "weighted" by the CA - it's split into partfile data and rare data and it only works with full chunks so creditshaping or "leech"shaping (being falsely identified as a leecher) shouldn't be possible (the latter actually is but that's kinda intended... if someone downloads a lot off you then it's OK to want something back... if not we should remove the CS completely and stop fighting leechers alltogether).
#129
Posted 23 March 2009 - 09:32 PM
tHeWiZaRdOfDoS, on Mar 23 2009, 07:56 PM, said:
In this example the remote client actually downloaded 18 MB off you and gave only 8 MB back so the UL/DL ratio comment is correct here (though I may be wrong, I didn't look into the official code for some time so I stand to be corrected).
Obviousely, it confuses you too. The confusion is about who did what, so changing it to sent/recived won't make it less confusing.
In the main windows it's "mine", and in client details it's "his". Once you understand that there's no confusion. .
It downloaded 8MB off me and gave 18MB to me, otherwise official modifier would not be 4.3.
Maybe it's DL/UL ratio was bad at some point, but surely not at that moment.
Or maybe the ratio changed while it was downloading and wasn't changed because it has not been on the waiting queue yet?
#130
Posted 07 May 2009 - 12:18 AM
#131
Posted 07 May 2009 - 12:49 AM
Let's see if I can track this, but actually I made no relevant changes to the menu code, except adding some items... thanks for the dump file however...
This post has been edited by Tuxman: 07 May 2009 - 12:50 AM
- feel the lightweight! - featuring Snarl support, the Client Analyzer and tits!
Coded by a Golden eMule Award winner and most people's favorite modder!
..........................................
Music, not muzak:
Progressive Rock :: my last.fm profile
..........................................
eMule user since 0.28 ...
-[ ... and thanks for all the fish! ]-
#132
Posted 17 June 2009 - 05:59 PM
I am currently modifying AnalyZZUL by request for a release group and I noticed that quite some parts of the analyzer are missing!
Namely: FileFaker and UDPFNF-Faker in DownloadClient.cpp as well as the anti-corruption code that I added while developing the CA (not lethal, though nice2have).
#133
Posted 17 June 2009 - 06:02 PM
(Maybe I'd add it, though...)
The other two things are maybe lost during merge...
3.1 release is planned however, thanks for the hints...
- feel the lightweight! - featuring Snarl support, the Client Analyzer and tits!
Coded by a Golden eMule Award winner and most people's favorite modder!
..........................................
Music, not muzak:
Progressive Rock :: my last.fm profile
..........................................
eMule user since 0.28 ...
-[ ... and thanks for all the fish! ]-