Discussion: Uploading Large Collections
-
This is a continuation of the discussion on the comment board for Gay - Chaos Men 66 Files More than 12 Hours.Wmv. Since it was about to turn into a discussion, it seemed more appropriate to bring to the forum.
(by hudsonjohns)
5.67Gigabytes? No offense but this thing's going to die a quick death. There are files within this package I would like to have, as I'm sure others want, and there are many more I don't want. Is it worth the effort and the ratio charge? Not likely. If someone wants to download and break this up into reasonable sized torrents many of us will be happy to seed but not at the current size.
(by the5cardstud)
To hudsonjohns:If you use Azureus, uTorrent, (and perhaps others), you can mark certain files to not download. That way you only get the files that you want (and you're not charged for the bytes that you do not download).
I'm not sure whether it would have been smarter to break these up. But since the upload has already begun, it is a moot point. Marking the files that you do not want is the best way for you to download this now.
HTH,
the5cardstud 8-)
PS: 5.5 GB for 12 hours of video – that's a pretty good deal, too!
(by stevebock)
To Hudsonjohn's:…..Really sorry but the files are for everybody and it's not really hard to download all the files and to choose one of them who wants to keep!!!!
And it's easy to condamn but harder to do......Sorry for my english, but i'm french!!!!
(by hudsonjohns)
I don't use Azureus and few Mac users do because it is a lousy p2p client, bloated and much too slow. Instead we use Transmission which allows us files transfers as fast as 500kbs and that's a great difference when using slow-poke azuereus at 40kbs. Why sit for two days downloading a file that you can get in two hours?But that's really not the point Rob - the point is offering a 5gig download torrent is a sure seed failure. I've had it running now since it was put up and it is deader than a doornail and I'm on a 9meg per second fiberoptic broadband connection. The average user simply doesn't have the time, broadband capability nor the hard disk space to store such a large wad of files. If I could get it I'd break it down and make it easier, unfortunately its at a deadstop now.
Check my personal stats and you'll see I'm a heavy downloader and seeder and after so much experience I can spot a dead seed quickly. Its sad that the uploader doesn't see that, sad for him and for the rest of us who would enjoy his vids.
5.5GB for 12 hours of video could be a good deal if those five hours of video were worth watching. So far no one's been able to judge squat and I'lll be by the end of 30 days the results will be the same, no one will be able to judge because no one will have the full 5.5GB. How many times have you downloaded a file that claims to be hotter than hot and you find it wasn't worth the download time or effort to begin with?
It is wiser to offer up 100-300 megged files in AVI or MPG format along with a set of good sized viewable photos (and not those ridiculous grid of tiny thumbnails which seem to be the only method so many MS users have available to them). The file will get seeded and be seen by a great many people. If they like it they won't hesitate to note the name of the member and remember his good taste and download more!
(and now my reply – the5cardstud)
Bloated is a manner of taste. Unlike most BitTorrent clients, it has more functionality, it is more extensible, and it is cross platform. For example, you can select the files you want in Azureus. Is that wasteful bloat, or a much needed feature?I wonder if you have your B's and b's mixed up. There is no way that Transmission is that much faster than Azureus – with or without the 'bloat.' I run Azureus on two different platforms. It does use a fair amount of cycles when it is a foreground application that is updating a table or graphic on the display. But if you leave it on "My Torrents" and keep it minimized, I find that it doesn't use much CPU at all.
How to handle a large collection like this is a tough decision. That's why I wanted to start this topic so we each could kick around our different points of view. But once the uploader has started, he should finish -- even if it was a bad decision in retrospect, it would be worse to stop and start over. It's also worse to start a second upload of smaller sets (as that second upload will slow down the first one even more).
-
searching various categories, including dead and sorting by size, it does seem as though people do not go after files this large often.
will it die? maybe, but there are some files, near this size, still active and aging well (some added around june 2006).
check out this one here .
8.23GB…lol. added 7-10-2006, and as i type this, still not dead.
personally, i dont have a problem with large file sizes.
if i want the file, i just get it and seed back. no big deal, it's free.lots of users do not have their upload speed adjusted properly, it's a fact.
i helped a couple of them through PM and chat.
when some people find out that their upload is effecting their download and web surfing, they tend to cut upload speed to 50% or less of their actual upload capacity.
it should be set at about 80%, adjust it + or - until your download speeds seem fine and web surfing is unaffected
usually 80% is just fine.
it might help some peoples ratio's, then file size or how many torrents a person wants may not be an issue. :whistle:
i wonder exactly how many users have 512kbps-1meg up, for example, and are only uploading at 3KB-25KB.Bloated is a manner of taste. Unlike most BitTorrent clients, it has more functionality, it is more extensible, and it is cross platform. For example, you can select the files you want in Azureus. Is that wasteful bloat, or a much needed feature?
I wonder if you have your B's and b's mixed up. There is no way that Transmission is that much faster than Azureus – with or without the 'bloat.' I run Azureus on two different platforms. It does use a fair amount of cycles when it is a foreground application that is updating a table or graphic on the display. But if you leave it on "My Torrents" and keep it minimized, I find that it doesn't use much CPU at all.
How to handle a large collection like this is a tough decision. That's why I wanted to start this topic so we each could kick around our different points of view. But once the uploader has started, he should finish -- even if it was a bad decision in retrospect, it would be worse to stop and start over. It's also worse to start a second upload of smaller sets (as that second upload will slow down the first one even more).
i completely agree .
i've had one torrent hit speeds of 800+KB, on this tracker.
yes well over 6400kbps, using azureus, and another hit 725KB+.
it just needs to be set up properly, along with router, firewall and upload limit.
in fact, i've always had better speeds with azureus, whether on a Mac, PC, or Linux.
i could understand a person whining about bloat if they were running an ancient box that had a 733Mhz cpu and 128MB of ram, but that's not an azureus problem…lol.azureus minimized and torrents running.
hxxp://img512.imageshack.us/img512/8029/azureushogginallsmyputeqf3.jpgi think that 5 or 6 file packs may have worked better.
if only 1 or 2 of the packs had a persons interest and they were able to clearly see they did not want the others, there would be less worries over file size or picking apart torrents.
5.5GB may scare people with slower connections or borderline ratios, who are honestly trying manage their sharing.
it could take a looooong time to seed that back for some. packs would give them a chance to recover too.
we'll see…
i noticed 70 leechers and a few of them in the 80-90% range, hopefully it'll seed well.good luck.
Edit
the uploader is seeding about 20 other torrents along with this, at a whopping 1.09KB.
yes...good luck. :rolleyes:trukr
-
Well, this particular torrent has been dead for days, no doubt is partly due to some people's complaining. If you don't want to download a large collection, don't – why complain about it? The seeder was kind enough to share his collection -- if you can't be gracious, just go download something else and let those of us that WANT this large collection to deal with it. Thanks for nothing.
-
I am sorry people but I am on Hudsn Johns side on this one.
I have viewed this file and it lots so damned hot I want the lot! but I wanted to wait until it had more seeders.
At this moment it has been upped for over 11 days, there is no seeder but with 52 leechers (a vast majority between 41.61-41.66 %).If this was a DVD there would be no discussion!
However, the point that I can see being made is that it COULD HAVE been broken down into more sizeable chunks. This is totally irrespective of ratios, torrent client, stream capacity and content (whether selected or not)!
Ratios: if you download you upload to pay back.
Torrent cliet: totally irrespective of what client you use, you cannot download something that has not been uploaded, regardless of speed or settings.
Stream capacity: if you want the file desperately enough you would not mind waiting for a while to get it and then time to payback.
Content: imagine if this was a basic film, but I only wanted the film because my favourite actor was is it. I would not complain about the film because the person I like was only in 2 of the 5 scenes nor would I ask the uplader to just seed the 2 scenes that I want. The fact that this is NOT a film is crucial.
Selection of content: with the client I use I can pick and choose the content to upload. If this was a foldered film with cover pictures, 'the making of' and a 'cumshot review' I could choose whether to upload all or just the basic film.
The above points, that I can see, are not being questioned, these are a matter of personal choice, what is being questioned is whether the film upload should have been split.
As far as I am concerned, it SHOULD have. No offence to the uploader.
A 600M chunk could have been uploaded and seeded, beyond its minimum 4, within 24 hours. Which would leave the uploader to upload the next 600M, then the next etc. Wherein after 10 days all the content is uploaded and seeding. Whereas, as I stated earlier, the upload has been running for 11 days and a majority are less than half way through.
Further to the selection of content, a scenario:
If a file contains 5 'items' and 5 different downloaders each want a different item what does the client do? (No doubt someone will tell me I am wrong in this hypothosis.) This is based on one uploader.
From what I understand of Bit Torrent it will share its given information EQUALLY. Therefore it would take each downloader the same ammount of time to download their 'item' as it would if they had asked for all 5 items. -
If a file contains 5 'items' and 5 different downloaders each want a different item what does the client do? (No doubt someone will tell me I am wrong in this hypothosis.) This is based on one uploader.
From what I understand of Bit Torrent it will share its given information EQUALLY. Therefore it would take each downloader the same ammount of time to download their 'item' as it would if they had asked for all 5 items.There are several issues that can cause some to be stuck, while others get a completed download, such as connection issues and cheater clients.
5 downloaders getting the same file goes faster than it 5 people are trying to get 5 completely different files. If a file is 10mb in size, the uploader can give 2mb to each of the 5 downloaders and in theory, he could stop uploading and the downloaders would end up with the whole file as long as each person got a different set of data. This is because the downloaders can now share their own 2mb of the file with each other until everyone has a complete copy.
If each of the downloaders wanted a separate file, then the uploader has to be there until everyone gets the whole thing, because there would be nothing for the downloaders to share between themselves.
-
Regadring Spiffy's acidic comment about blaming someone elses complaints/comments for the slow upload of this file.
Perhaps someone should have a word with the uploader, presuming they can speak French!?
This is the first time that I have actually seen him on-line so I just checked over his stats.
Since he has made the Choas Men upload he has since uploaded 2 other files, 1 of which is a 4G DVD!
As well as the 3 concurrent uploads he is seeding a further SEVENTEEN files!!!
He is currently uploading @ 43.19kB/s.
I have a 250 kB/s download and 30 kB/s upload and I was asked/told by one of the moderators to download/seed a MAXIMUM of 2 files (if I am uploading a file, that and that alone!).
-
Regadring Spiffy's acidic comment about blaming someone elses complaints/comments for the slow upload of this file.
Perhaps someone should have a word with the uploader, presuming they can speak French!?
This is the first time that I have actually seen him on-line so I just checked over his stats.
Since he has made the Choas Men upload he has since uploaded 2 other files, 1 of which is a 4G DVD!
As well as the 3 concurrent uploads he is seeding a further SEVENTEEN files!!!
He is currently uploading @ 43.19kB/s.
I have a 250 kB/s download and 30 kB/s upload and I was asked/told by one of the moderators to download/seed a MAXIMUM of 2 files (if I am uploading a file, that and that alone!).
I have seen him upload @ 76KB before, and seed 20 other torrents along with his uploads
He could have had that seeded in a day or 2.
Thats why I suggested, maybe, 1GB packs for this particular situation.I'm wondering if Spiffy hit the nail on the head…
Good points Spiffy.Edit
You summed it up nicely in your previous post seedym.
-
I have sent the uploader 2 PMs requesting that he finish seeding, I have just checked and it actually says he is seeding it again (although it only shows up if you search for dead torrents).
I would also just like to say thank you to the uploader as I feel this hasn't been said enough
sgmusuk
-
Thankfully we now have some decent collection rules. http://tracker.gaytorrent.ru/faq.php?lan=1#488
link coirrected
