Remove user from queue if to slow

Use this forum to flesh out your feature request before you enter it in <a href="http://dcpp.net/bugzilla/">Bugzilla</a>.

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
AlgoJerViA
Posts: 2
Joined: 2005-11-19 05:32
Location: Sweden, Göteborg
Contact:

Remove user from queue if to slow

Post by AlgoJerViA » 2005-11-19 05:54

Hi
I would like to see that it would be automaticly posibly to remove users from queue if theier download speed is not fast enough.
I have 24Mbit in and I often have to sitt and manually remove users from the queues in serveral diffrent files becouse theier upload speed is about 1Kb/s or even worse 100b/s... meaing the file i want to download wile take about a year insted of 10min.

//Andreas

joakim_tosteberg
Forum Moderator
Posts: 587
Joined: 2003-05-07 02:38
Location: Sweden, Linkoping

Post by joakim_tosteberg » 2005-11-19 05:57

This have begun to get implemented in the current development version of DC++ and will be present in the next release.

bastya_elvtars
Posts: 164
Joined: 2005-01-06 08:39
Location: HU
Contact:

Post by bastya_elvtars » 2005-11-19 05:58

This (orsomething like this) will be implemented into DC++ 0.69.
Hey you, / Don't help them to bury the light... / Don't give in / Without a fight. (Pink Floyd)

AlgoJerViA
Posts: 2
Joined: 2005-11-19 05:32
Location: Sweden, Göteborg
Contact:

Post by AlgoJerViA » 2005-11-19 07:06

cool... is there a nighlty build? or is it posible to compile with Code::Block?

TheParanoidOne
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1420
Joined: 2003-04-22 14:37

Post by TheParanoidOne » 2005-11-19 07:12

There are no nightly builds. You can either compile it yourself from CVS code (though that isn't particularly stable right now) or wait for the next release.
The world is coming to an end. Please log off.

DC++ Guide | Words

Guitarm
Forum Moderator
Posts: 385
Joined: 2004-01-18 15:38

Post by Guitarm » 2005-11-19 07:14

It's a CVS version which is available for browsing or downloading at http://sourceforge.net/cvs/?group_id=40287.

You need to have VS.Net 2003, STLPort and WTL to compile it.
"Nothing really happens fast. Everything happens at such a rate that by the time it happens, it all seems normal."

Pothead
Posts: 223
Joined: 2005-01-15 06:55

Post by Pothead » 2005-11-19 08:05

Isn't python a requirement as well now (for makedefs ?) :)

Guitarm
Forum Moderator
Posts: 385
Joined: 2004-01-18 15:38

Post by Guitarm » 2005-11-19 08:10

Pothead wrote:Isn't python a requirement as well now (for makedefs ?) :)
I guess so, aswell as a CVS client for downloading the source (I use TortoiseCVS myself)
"Nothing really happens fast. Everything happens at such a rate that by the time it happens, it all seems normal."

Wisp
Posts: 218
Joined: 2003-04-01 10:58

Post by Wisp » 2005-12-07 15:12

Is multiple source downloading also implemented in the next version? Revconnect has that feature already and the source if freely available, so it shouldn't be hard to implement that until the next protocol is ready.

bastya_elvtars
Posts: 164
Joined: 2005-01-06 08:39
Location: HU
Contact:

Post by bastya_elvtars » 2005-12-07 15:23

Wisp wrote:Is multiple source downloading also implemented in the next version? Revconnect has that feature already and the source if freely available, so it shouldn't be hard to implement that until the next protocol is ready.


I doubt it will be implemented.
Hey you, / Don't help them to bury the light... / Don't give in / Without a fight. (Pink Floyd)

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2005-12-07 15:29

Wisp wrote:Revconnect has that feature already and the source if freely available, so it shouldn't be hard to implement that until the next protocol is ready.

That's not quite the way DC++ does things. arnetheduck, the copyright owner of DC++, only implements code from mods if the authors write over the copyright to him, to avoid any nasty copyright-issues down the line (one holder = much easier to enforce copyright). So unless revconnect signs over the rights, which they're not likely to do i guess, you'll have to wait 'til arne makes his own version.

Wisp
Posts: 218
Joined: 2003-04-01 10:58

Post by Wisp » 2005-12-07 15:41

Todi wrote:That's not quite the way DC++ does things. arnetheduck, the copyright owner of DC++, only implements code from mods if the authors write over the copyright to him, to avoid any nasty copyright-issues down the line (one holder = much easier to enforce copyright). So unless revconnect signs over the rights, which they're not likely to do i guess, you'll have to wait 'til arne makes his own version.

That's too bad. I thought that the GNU license allowed the usage of the code as long as the program where the code is used in, is also open-source.

Maybe some dc++ developer could take a look at the revconnect code and make something similar.

joakim_tosteberg
Forum Moderator
Posts: 587
Joined: 2003-05-07 02:38
Location: Sweden, Linkoping

Post by joakim_tosteberg » 2005-12-07 15:46

Wisp wrote:
Todi wrote:That's not quite the way DC++ does things. arnetheduck, the copyright owner of DC++, only implements code from mods if the authors write over the copyright to him, to avoid any nasty copyright-issues down the line (one holder = much easier to enforce copyright). So unless revconnect signs over the rights, which they're not likely to do i guess, you'll have to wait 'til arne makes his own version.

That's too bad. I thought that the GNU license allowed the usage of the code as long as the program where the code is used in, is also open-source.
It does, but it is still the author of the code that has the copyright of it.

TheParanoidOne
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1420
Joined: 2003-04-22 14:37

Post by TheParanoidOne » 2005-12-07 18:00

Wisp wrote:I thought that the GNU license ...

License != copyright
The world is coming to an end. Please log off.

DC++ Guide | Words

liny
Posts: 30
Joined: 2003-11-01 09:18

Post by liny » 2005-12-07 20:43

Todi wrote:arnetheduck, the copyright owner of DC++, only implements code from mods if the authors write over the copyright to him, to avoid any nasty copyright-issues down the line (one holder = much easier to enforce copyright). So unless revconnect signs over the rights, which they're not likely to do i guess


I would give copyright to arnetheduck, if he want.

bastya_elvtars
Posts: 164
Joined: 2005-01-06 08:39
Location: HU
Contact:

Post by bastya_elvtars » 2005-12-07 21:23

liny wrote:
Todi wrote:arnetheduck, the copyright owner of DC++, only implements code from mods if the authors write over the copyright to him, to avoid any nasty copyright-issues down the line (one holder = much easier to enforce copyright). So unless revconnect signs over the rights, which they're not likely to do i guess


I would give copyright to arnetheduck, if he want.


If only everyone thought the same way... :roll:
Hey you, / Don't help them to bury the light... / Don't give in / Without a fight. (Pink Floyd)

Carraya
Posts: 112
Joined: 2004-09-21 11:43

Post by Carraya » 2005-12-08 03:21

I still don't think it's going to happen, even if liny would give the copyright away...
<random funny comment>

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2005-12-08 12:22

liny wrote:I would give copyright to arnetheduck, if he want.

Interesting, I'll make sure he sees that.

iceman50
Posts: 6
Joined: 2004-03-21 08:29
Location: chicago
Contact:

Post by iceman50 » 2005-12-09 20:41

hmm sounds interesting should be even more interesting to see what happens
Infinitus est numerus stultorum - Infinite is the number of fools

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2005-12-10 10:18

liny wrote:I would give copyright to arnetheduck, if he want.

I thought about this a bit more after I posted my response - you don't have copyright assignment as part of your terms for accepting patches, right? If not, copyright for the code in question is spread out over everyone who contributed to that code. In order to give the code to arne, you'll need permission from everyone who patched the multi-source code. I think BigMuscle did, and he'd probably be receptive to it, but you still have to clear it by him and everyone else.

Big Muscle
Posts: 72
Joined: 2004-01-23 14:45

Post by Big Muscle » 2005-12-16 15:41

I didn't patched segmented downloading in RevConnect. I've only improved in StrongDC++ to use ADCGET command, download by chunks and not need reconnect when chunk is finished.

If arne wants it, he can take it.

phaedrus
Posts: 1
Joined: 2005-12-16 15:51

Post by phaedrus » 2005-12-20 14:46

the way i see it, if arne does this, he will single-handedly turn the entire dc comunity into a segment downloading comunity. his client right now is the dam holding back the entire ocean. it would bring a paradigm change across the entire comunity, the conversion is no small leap to take. i love the convenience of segment downloading but i dont think it would be such a good idea having it adopted in such a massive scale. if it does get implemented, it should not be built upon a single segment framework.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2005-12-20 16:29

Perhaps, if it's implemented, it should be ADC only.. in order to encourage a protocol shift.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2005-12-20 16:41

Todi wrote:Perhaps, if it's implemented, it should be ADC only.. in order to encourage a protocol shift.
The parts that make it (safely) possible already are borrowed from ADC - hash exchange is done only with $ADCGET's name spaces. Blocks of the file can be requested with $GetZBlock/$UGetBlock/$UGetZBlock, which is nominally NMDC, even just as an extension.

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2005-12-20 17:53

phaedrus wrote:the way i see it, if arne does this, he will single-handedly turn the entire dc comunity into a segment downloading comunity. his client right now is the dam holding back the entire ocean. it would bring a paradigm change across the entire comunity, the conversion is no small leap to take. i love the convenience of segment downloading but i dont think it would be such a good idea having it adopted in such a massive scale. if it does get implemented, it should not be built upon a single segment framework.
So it's fine for you, but not okay if everyone does as you do?


Regardless, we usually talk about upload queues and credit systems when we talk about segmented downloads, at least historically. I don't buy the "the sky is falling" argument; I'm reserving my judgement.

PseudonympH
Forum Moderator
Posts: 366
Joined: 2004-03-06 02:46

Post by PseudonympH » 2005-12-20 18:54

At least for an initial implementation, the multisource should try to not be too greedy -- it should limit itself to a handful of sources, especially if multiple files are being downloaded. Once we see the effects of it being widespread, then we can move from there.

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2005-12-20 18:55

That might prove useful anyway, under the XP SP2 TCP/IP stack.

RHIncredible
Posts: 2
Joined: 2006-01-13 22:15

Post by RHIncredible » 2006-01-13 22:26

All this talk about segmented downloads and copyrights is fascinating but honestly I would REALLY love to see this auto-kick for slow downloads implemented. I can not express just how frustrating it is to sit and baby sit my queue because there are 500 users with the file I want and 450 of them can't even sustain 1KB/s and then once one of these gracious users with 1KB/s is found with a slot for that file I miss out on all the decent connections that I could be downloading from if it wasnt already being downloaded from this crappy connection. I would MUCH rather just wait till a reasonable connection is available rather than download files in this dribble fashion.

Todi
Forum Moderator
Posts: 699
Joined: 2003-03-04 12:16
Contact:

Post by Todi » 2006-01-13 22:58

RHIncredible wrote:All this talk about segmented downloads and copyrights is fascinating but honestly.. blabla
Bother to read the changelog for DC++ 0.68 before you complain?

RHIncredible
Posts: 2
Joined: 2006-01-13 22:15

Post by RHIncredible » 2006-01-14 08:22

Todi wrote:
RHIncredible wrote:All this talk about segmented downloads and copyrights is fascinating but honestly.. blabla
Bother to read the changelog for DC++ 0.68 before you complain?
Actually I wasnt complaining I was expressing my enthusiasm for an invaluable feature, also I was using .674 and since the posts above said that the feature was going to be in .69 I didnt bother cheching .68, now I have.

SubversiveAgent
Posts: 53
Joined: 2006-03-27 06:11

Post by SubversiveAgent » 2006-03-27 07:39

Seems I wasn't the only complaining. Today I complain and find out the feature already got implemented in the last build. Now THAT is good service! :D

Locked