aMule Forum

English => Multiplatform => Mac OSX => Topic started by: igor79 on February 22, 2005, 05:26:29 PM

Title: poor performance :-(
Post by: igor79 on February 22, 2005, 05:26:29 PM
With latest CVS - 21-2-05 - i got always 20-22ul and 0-0,5dl :-(
(highid, open ports etc.)


Can anyone post please detailed settings for an ADSL connection (i got a 1500/320 connection) - core tweaks, connections etc.

Thank you very much
Igor
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: Kry on February 22, 2005, 05:51:29 PM
lower upload to 10 and re-test.
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: igor79 on February 22, 2005, 06:15:12 PM
Thx, but doesn't help - still 0-2k/sec dl... :-(
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: phoenix on February 22, 2005, 06:26:37 PM
igor79,

Download speed depends also on the client you are downloading from. Make sure you are changing the right numbers. Set Preferences->Connections->Bandwidth Limits->Upload to 10, like Kry said, not Preferences->Connections->Line Capacities->Upload. Also try max sources ~400 and max connections ~50-60. You can slowly grow some of these numbers when you know what you are doing. Also put Preferences->Core Tweaks->Advanced Settings->Max New Conn./5 seconds = 5.

You sometimes have to wait a lot to start downloading at good speed. There is a credit system that also affects download speed.

Monitor any differences on the Statistics tab graphs, it is a good way to get a feeling of what you are doing.

Cheers!
Title: dl dripples?
Post by: m2kio on February 23, 2005, 01:58:47 PM
this is a template file. :)

general:

dl generally depends on your peers.

as a rule of thumb i'd say, if dl is very good, it comes from a chinese sever and the film is jap/nosub or jap/chinese sub. (i'm fond of animes ;) )

if it comes at moderate speed, it is english dub or sub.

if it dripples, regardless of what you try, it's non-english dub and/or non-english sub.

The reason is the wide-spread use of ADSL e.g. in europe. No matter how fast you _could_ dl, you can only dl what is up'd somewhere. so the overall limit is the lower of ul and dl. be more picky about your upstream bandwidth next time.

many sources for a file do not mean faster download. opposite is sometimes more true. many available sources mean also many peers downloading from those sources. they are all more ahead in each others lists than YOU. they all have huge lists too. whom ever you send a block advances you in his list more rapidly, meaning you may be served after 2 days, not a week. funny, eh?

mac:

dl performance on mac is still overall not good, though usable.

what can you do?
(not only mac!)

1) make shure you got a high id from the connected server.

2) in preferences > connections > Bandwidth limits: set upload to approx. 75% of your bandwidth. don't set it to or near to 100% or to less than 50%. the more you serve the more credits you collect the more early you are served. note: your bandwidth speed is typically expressed in bits/sec, not byte/sec. => divide by 8!

2a) Set slot allocation to at least 3 kB/s. This is the lower limit to serve a full block in less than a hour. Sessions are preempted after an hour (most times) and up'ing incomlete blocks dramatically decreases the seeding speed for blocks. If you don't serve a complete block X to a peer, that peer can't spread it either. If he can't, other peers will think, block X is rare. If they think block X is rare, they will retrieve block X, which you already have and which you are no longer interested in, from other peers, instead of another also available block Y, which you might be eagerly waiting for.

3) on same page: set Max connections to not more than 100. (i don't know what is the preset now, but when i started with amule it was much higher)

4) trim the amount of served files so that you don't get more than 2000 peers waiting in your queue. less is better. each peer waiting regularly talks to you, using bandwidth, potentially hogging now and then. Up'ing at full speed is enough! a huge waiting list is not. If you try to dl a file with many sources, even serving only this single file might already be enough. on the other hand keeping rare stuff available does not hurt, because rare stuff implies rare requests to. But you should increase priority for rare files, so people have a chance to get them in full.

5) keep it running. some peers serve, but only after long waiting times.

5a) keep it running, even if you currently don't dl anything. be nice, reduce the ADSL bottleneck and collect credits. Serve files which are similar to those you might be requesting next, e.g. same series, same genre, so you get preferably credits from peers which might have the stuff you are looking for tomorrow.


thanks for reading.

... m2kio !
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: igor79 on February 23, 2005, 07:30:09 PM
my settings:
Download 60
Upload 14
Slot Allocation 4
Max Sources Hard limit: 300
Max conn: 50

Source Dropping
Drop sources, Enable auto drop Full and High checked
HQ Rating value 12000
Timer 120

Core Tweaks
Max/5sec: 5
Use safe max conn checked
File Buffer Size 195000
Ul Q Size 2400
Server conn refresh disabled

Dual G5 2Ghz, OSX 10.3.8, router configured, port forwarded, highID always
My DSL is a 1500/320

For now i ul 1,44Gb and dl 250Mb... :-(
Usually I dl at 3-4k/sec for few minutes, then nothing for 5-10mins, then again 3-4k/sec; ul is always full with 1-2k/sec of overhead

* m2kio: the problem is with amule, not with the net in general imho; with other clients (kdrive, edo2000) i have min 30-40k/sec; i tried to dl very popoular files with >300sources, but the speed is the same; maybe there is a problem with the credit system -> usually i dl from clients with amule, edo2000 - imho the problem is between amule <-> emule

Thank you to all for all the help
igor79
Title: Same problem
Post by: faibistes on February 23, 2005, 08:18:31 PM
Isn't anyone addressing this issue? Isn't there anything we, the users, can do to bring some light?
I agree completely with Igor79.
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: phoenix on February 23, 2005, 09:24:44 PM
faibistes,

The developers can do something, if they have a clue. Any information is usefull. But just "amule is slow" or "emule is faster" doesn't help a lot. Don't get me wrong, I want to help and I appreciate that the users are reporting a problem, but unfortunately this seems to be a puzzle hard to crack. :(

Cheers!
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: lionel77 on February 24, 2005, 01:42:22 AM
the problem is already relatively well documented here (http://forum.amule.org/thread.php?threadid=4471&sid=) (in terms of its phenomena).

what we really need imho is a coordinated debugging attempt. for this it would be really great is if somebody could implement some sort of logging code that would start whenever a download connection is initiated, so that we could hopefully get a better idea about what exactly is going wrong. i fear that just observing from the outside how the download connections die after a short while will not be very informative.

the mac port has made an impressive progress over the last couple month and this is really the only issue that is more than a minor nuisance. unfortunately many people judge their p2p clients primarily by their ability to download stuff and if amule downloads only at 10-20% of the speed of edonkey or mldonkey those mac users that have recently discovered amule will consider switching back to their old clients.

i am confident we have the user resources to do the necessary testing but in order to utilize them well i think we need a bit more guidance from the developers. so any kind of debugging strategy/testing suggestion would be really great... :)
Title: dl drippling and so on
Post by: m2kio on February 24, 2005, 10:32:49 AM
@igor79

i didn't want to say that there is no problem in amule. in fact, there is. what i suggested was to remedy as best as can be. i personally get a ul/dl ratio of approx. 2.5/1.0, but this heavily depends on what i try to get. and i leave it running, even if not dl'ing.

@linonell77

yes, i have also already suggested some additional debugging code to narrow the cause. but obviously this is additional work, loaded to the developers and you need some clues beforehead. probably. they'll probably do if they can't help otherwise...   ;(

and, yes, it has improved much!  :baby: (to the developers ;) )

additional observations:

ul's also fail frequently, just not so obvious, because ul queue is full anyway.

maybe it's not a byte order problem, at least not in amule itself, because ppl report better performance with linux on a mac.

... m2kio !
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: Kry on February 24, 2005, 10:41:11 PM
Quote
usually i dl from clients with amule, edo2000 - imho the problem is between amule <-> emule

Can someone confirm this?
Title: eMule <-> aMule compatibility
Post by: faibistes on February 25, 2005, 08:49:54 AM
I'll be very pleased to confirm that, if you tell me how. Is there any log/trace I can activate? I mean, casual inspection of the interface isn't halfway serious.
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: igor79 on February 26, 2005, 03:26:57 AM
I've tried emule with virtualpc and it was very good (40/50ksec after few minutes), but i want to helpm as a "beta-tester" the amule on the macosx, so please give me all the infos for a good "beta-testing" ;-)
(my english is very poor, my apologize)

thanx,
igor79
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: lionel77 on February 28, 2005, 11:14:44 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Kry
Quote
usually i dl from clients with amule, edo2000 - imho the problem is between amule <-> emule

Can someone confirm this?

you can find a new build here (http://forum.amule.org/thread.php?sid=&postid=27851#post27851) that lists amount of download separately for different client brands in the stats. this should allow us to figure out whether the problem is emule->amule specific or whether it applies to all clients we are downloading from.
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: m2kio on March 01, 2005, 11:27:19 AM
hi,

i don't think that it's emule-only. i just restarted amule (w/ debug version) and all dl'ing connections right now are emules.

EDIT: ah, i just see: socket bug in wxMac (where else?!!) found&fixed. Waiting for new version...

... m2kio !
Title: Re: poor performance :-(
Post by: lionel77 on March 01, 2005, 05:44:42 PM
case closed (http://forum.amule.org/thread.php?threadid=5301&sid=) i would say... :D