Deluge keeps grinding to a halt (Linux/Ubuntu)

[Thrender]

Deluge Version: 1.3.6
Libtorrent Version: 0.15.10.0
Operating System Version: Linux (64-bit Ubuntu 12.04 LTS)

Deluge has been a rock-solid torrent performer for me for many months, but last week it started acting up. Sometimes it would run 100% CPU usage and have to be killed to stop, sometimes it would simply fail to upload or download torrents that have plenty of seeders and leechers.

I enabled debugging for a while, and among the miles of debug code that it generated, I got a lot of:

Code: Select all

[DEBUG   ] 20:17:06 alertmanager:123 performance_alert: [TORRENT NAME]: performance warning: send buffer watermark too low (upload rate will suffer)

That line repeats for 99% of the debug file. Before digging through the rest of the debugging stuff, how do I resolve a problem with "send buffer watermark too low"?

UPDATE: After this most recent running ground to a halt, I quit out of the application and relaunched it. Unfortunately, it locked up and I had to kill the process. Then I relaunched it again and the same thing happened. I'm guessing it is time to uninstall and reinstall Deluge.....

Nope. Reinstalling it twice (once using CLI, once using the Ubuntu Software Center) made no difference. It locks up every time I run it.

[FalconV]

Did you ever figure this out? I'm getting the exact same message repeated like crazy in my logs. I haven't noticed CPU usage, and haven't had to kill it manually, it just will run for a seemingly random period of time, then just stop. I'm also on the same versions (Deluge 1.3.6, Libtorrent 0.15.10.0, Ubuntu Server x64 12.04.2 LTS)

I found http://dev.deluge-torrent.org/ticket/1466 regarding this issue, and http://forum.deluge-torrent.org/viewtop ... =7&t=40337 where someone reported using the patch fixed the issue; I can't tell, but it looked like the patch made it into the main code. The bug ticket also referenced http://forum.deluge-torrent.org/viewtop ... =7&t=33839 where the issue wasn't stability, it was slow performance. He fixed it by modifying the deluge/core/core.py a little bit. I haven't tried this yet.

When yours started acting up, did you make any changes that you're aware of? I had recently fixed my FlexGet so it started adding things (using the Deluge API), and also manually added approximately 60 torrents (configured to have 3 active, the rest are queued).


Edit: I tried modifying deluge/core/core.py with the settings he added to resolve his issue; it didn't work. After making the changes, I started the daemon from the WebUI, and in maybe 30 seconds the daemon stopped.

UPDATE: I went ahead and cleaned everything out and reinstalled, it seems to be working now. I couldn't just uninstall though, I had to uninstall everything deluge, delete the /var/lib/deluge directory, reinstall, and then recreate the folder. I didn't even copy in my old config files, I just reconfigured everything. I then manually added the torrents (didn't use FlexGet, though I'd be surprised if using FlexGet would have caused this problem); the daemon seems to be running fine, has been up for a half day so-far, and downloading at normal speeds (before it would be running maybe 1/10 normal speed before crashing). Hope this helps.

[asensio]

Hi,

I'm having the same issue with Deluge 1.3.6 and Ubuntu LTS 12.04.2 x64. Deluge keeps using my CPU well over 100% and, of course, it's temperature keeps rising.
I tried reinstalling everything (thank you, FalconV). It didn't work. So, after debbuging and getting the watermark error, I went on to edit torrentmanager.py.

I found two files with the same name:
/usr/share/pyshared/deluge/core/torrentmanager.py wich I edited adding the lines in the patch from Ticket #1466
and
/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/deluge/core/torrentmanager.py that already had the patch...

I have no idea why those two files were different... is it suppose to be that way?
Well, but the problem persists. Now I noticed that deluge was also using 1Gb of RAM... I'm going to need some help too.

Edit: Disregard last paragraph. After a reboot everything seems to be ok. I think editing torrentmanager.py did the trick.

Edit2: Nop! The problem persists but only when downloading... High CPU em RAM usage, even with ThinClient.
Cheers
asensio

[Cas]

I have no idea why those two files were different... is it suppose to be that way?

The files are symlinked.

Can you clarify is this deluged or deluge using high cpu or ram? How many torrents are loaded?

[asensio]

Thanks, Cas

First I was using deluge (in classical mode) and got high CPU and RAM usage, then I edited the torrentmanager.py and restarted deluge, but it kept using too much resources. I then rebooted and fired up deluge. After the reboot everything seemed to be ok (hence the first edit). Then, thinking everything was good, I setted up the thin client. After a while it was deluged using all the resources. I got a torrent for a little file because I thought it was just when downloading (edit2) but no...

In all this up and down, I had 10 torrents loaded, none of them was downloading. I used the command "deluged -L debug -l deluge.debug" and the file created was about 1Gb, almost all of it had the line:

Code: Select all

[DEBUG   ] 20:17:06 alertmanager:123 performance_alert: [TORRENT NAME]: performance warning: send buffer watermark too low (upload rate will suffer)

I thought it was the torrent on the debug file that somehow was doind this, so I deleted it.. again, no luck.
Just now I had to stop deluged...
Hope you can help,
Cheers
asensio

[asensio]

Hi

I removed de Deluge Team from my PPA, uninstalled everything that had "deluge" in it's name and then tried using Deluge 1.3.5 wich is on the Ubuntu Repos. I had the same problem, too much CPU and RAM usage.
Don't know what to do next... I'm out of ideas
asensio

[asensio]

no news about this?
cheers

[guzzi_jones]

i am using 1.3.5. on Ubuntu LTS 12.04 x64.
I am also getting the error where the downloads stop attaching to seeders.
I also have the above stated error about "watermark too low" in my logs.

anything else i can look for or try?