Page 22 of 23

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2022 10:17 am
by highvoltage
mhertz wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 11:26 pm Still no changes in high-performance-seed preset, in latest libtorrent 2.0.8 and 1.2.18 compared to the last ltconfig builds I posted.

Well, to be completely honest then there where two options removed after libtorrent 2.0.5, read/write_cache_line_size, which I was to lazy to rebuild for, because they have zero influence anyway regardless, but just did now to be fully "propper", but as said, not important and need not update. It's only the libtorrent 2.x build, and not the 1.2.x one, but I just repost the old link to the 1.2.x build also, just to have the links together.

Last, as said, only need use my builds if actually selecting specifically in it: 'high-performance-seed' > 'load-preset' > 'apply', as otherwise irrelevant as your own older settings in ltconfig.conf used regardless of my changes here.

Libtorrent 2.0.6 - 2.0.8 high-performance-seed preset update:
ltConfig-2.0.0.egg

Libtorrent 1.2.15 - 1.2.18 high-performance-seed preset update:
ltConfig-2.0.0.egg
mhertz thanks very much

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Mon Dec 12, 2022 10:43 am
by mhertz
You're welcome my friend! :) And likewise much thanks for going out of your way to help me, when I last asked. Take care bro.

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Fri Aug 04, 2023 6:14 pm
by mhertz
Ltconfig build with updated high-performance-seed preset(up-to-date as per 2.0.9/1.2.19 currently, but fine in older versions too):

ltConfig-2.0.0.egg

I just made single version for both 2.0.x and 1.2.x, as only diff was the removed cache settings, and two related ones, all ignored anyway in 2.0.x.

Again, only the 'load-preset' button used for high-performance-seed preset, will make a diff with this build, nothing else, e.g. if already running older config and not gonna press said button, then this is useless and so just ignore.

Also, there's not so much changed/added afterall, about 5 settings in all round-about, and just many removed instead, but this time I decided keep all old settings too(like it did too originally), so have no minimum version, as just is ignored on newer versions anyway.

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2023 1:40 pm
by Ser4ph4
mhertz wrote: Fri Aug 04, 2023 6:14 pm Ltconfig build with updated high-performance-seed preset(up-to-date as per 2.0.9/1.2.19 currently, but fine in older versions too):

ltConfig-2.0.0.egg

I just made single version for both 2.0.x and 1.2.x, as only diff was the removed cache settings, and two related ones, all ignored anyway in 2.0.x.

Again, only the 'load-preset' button used for high-performance-seed preset, will make a diff with this build, nothing else, e.g. if already running older config and not gonna press said button, then this is useless and so just ignore.

Also, there's not so much changed/added afterall, about 5 settings in all round-about, and just many removed instead, but this time I decided keep all old settings too(like it did too originally), so have no minimum version, as just is ignored on newer versions anyway.
Hello friend, thank you very much for this, I'm testing it here and it works fine so far. :)

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2023 3:53 pm
by mhertz
Good to hear buddy, you're most welcome and I appreciate your testing and kind post bro, thanks! :)

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sat Aug 05, 2023 10:07 pm
by ambipro
Did you remember to change active_trackers? :)

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2023 9:34 am
by mhertz
:)

Sorry did I make a mistake('active_tracker_limit' is unchanged in preset).

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2023 11:45 am
by ambipro
I would propose that "active_tracker_limit" be set way higher than the default in high-performance seed. I don't think 0 or -1 works, although I have not tested this or looked into an "unlimited" setting in libtorrent, it could be beneficial to default to a rather high value to get rid of the active seeding torrents being limited, especially if we assume the high-performance seed is being used for what it's name implies.

Just a thought.

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2023 2:46 pm
by mhertz
I would propose that too(@libtorrent - src/session.cpp), raising default 1600 to merely 2000 in that preset seems way off(probably oversight of old times where default was 320 etc), so we agree, but I don't wanna stray away from official preset here though, but agree fully - We could add another custom one though instead, unofficial, but not that good at tuning libtorrent in general as you know, so probably better leave up to end user instead. Good suggestion though :)

-1 mentioned allowed in api docs, but never tested myself.

Re: [Plugin] ltConfig v2.0.0

Posted: Sun Aug 06, 2023 3:12 pm
by ambipro
mhertz wrote: Sun Aug 06, 2023 2:46 pm I would propose that too(@libtorrent - src/session.cpp), raising default 1600 to merely 2000 in that preset seems way off(probably oversight of old times where default was 320 etc), so we agree, but I don't wanna stray away from official preset here though, but agree fully - We could add another custom one though instead, unofficial, but not that good at tuning libtorrent in general as you know, so probably better leave up to end user instead. Good suggestion though :)

-1 mentioned allowed in api docs, but never tested myself.
My experience is that it's very hardware/OS/kernel specific (settings in ltConfig/libtorrent). For instance, those using nvme cache drives, the aio settings would not be even close to the same as those with spinning disks (myself for instance) and while most of the time this would be irrelevant because download speeds would rarely exceed, something like a low piece size could thrash spinning drives where IOPS on nvme would be much higher and could deal.

There's also connection/s, cache for 1.2.x, and many other settings that are dependent on internet ISP/speed, memory, CPU, etc...and all this in combination with a bunch of others just leaves it all, as you said, mostly better suited for the end-user to configure much of it.

All that aside, I do think that active_tracker_limit is a pretty useless/niche feature....the setting of this to a default value that is not unlimited seems counter to almost every use case. I think the vast majority would be better suited with unlimited, and the OPTION to set (just check if an integer) to some arbitrary value.

I'll check the github and maybe propose this, but I'm not hopeful after seeing much of their responses to things like mmap'ing and stuff...."we know best so we deny this request, this is intended behavior" seems to be the general dev consensus. :/