Feels very redditty, which is why I’m asking…

Also, what are total buffer size (what does it affect) and session waste (what does it affect)? qbittorrent-nox on Linux.

  • LemmyEntertainYou@piefed.socialEnglish
    71·
    9 hours ago

    My ratio is awful because the tracker I usually use has a seeding rule of either a 1 ratio or 10 days seeding and after those 10 days I’m pretty much always on 0 upload.

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.comEnglish
      2·
      4 hours ago

      Same. It’s fucking annoying. I get wanting to vet people but the limits they start you with are a joke when there’s not enough demand to actually build up the ratio they want.

      • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        2·
        5 hours ago

        6 months x 0 upload is still zero upload. I permaseed most things but since I don’t use a seedbox, I miss out on a lot of upload credit on new files since my home internet connection can’t compete with a seedbox’s upload credit. Luckily most trackers account for this and give you bonuses based on seed time so it doesnt really matter and having a mix of fast but short-lived seeders along with slower but long term seeders helps everyone.

        • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
          1·
          4 hours ago

          I have (need) a seedbox and can’t really relate. But if you host it on your server that can perma-run it’s not much different to what I am using.
          And just seeding will not guarantee any traffic. I have torrents that I cross-seed with wildly different ratios.

          My advice:
          See if you are even reachable (port-forward/no cg-nat)
          Try to move to a system that can 24/7

          • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            1·
            1 hour ago

            Unless your home internet has multi-gigabit upload, you’ll never be able to compete with seedbox users when new uploads drop and everyone is downloading them at the same time. Your seedbox can upload at 10x-100x the rate my home internet can which is why seedbox users capture all the seeding credit on new uploads. Once a file has been out a day or two, the only people downloading are new users or people who aren’t using automation tools like sonarr/radarr which are few and far between.

            The tradeoff here is that your seedbox storage capacity several orders of magnitude lower than my 50TB home server, so I can keep these files seeding forever much like the parable about the tortoise and the hare (though without the deeper meaning).

          • boonhet@sopuli.xyzEnglish
            1·
            2 hours ago

            That still involves downloading shit you don’t want just to get ratio. Which is kinda stupid IMO

            I’m running 24/7, I’ve got one torrent running for 2 years with a ratio of 10 (and not even a small one) while most things get 0 kB up in even a year.

  • black0ut@pawb.socialEnglish
    26·
    16 hours ago

    It’s a bit redditty, and a bit spammy, but I think it’s healthy every once in a while. It may encourage seeders to get bigger numbers in a sort of healthy competition, which also benefits the swarm. Someone could do an annual stat sharing post or something, to keep the tradition going but also contained for those who don’t like it.

    Anyways, here are my stats:

    • printf("%s", name);@piefed.blahaj.zoneOPEnglish
      9·
      13 hours ago

      That’s a really healthy take on the matter! Nice! Yeah, the point is more mutual encouragement, exchanging of tips and tricks, rather than competition. In this economy, people shouldn’t have to feel down because of hardware limitations.

      Thanks for sharing! I promise, I won’t ask again for a year. 🤣

  • percent@infosec.pubEnglish
    8·
    15 hours ago

    Mine is around 1.1. I don’t use any trackers, so no obligations there. I seed just enough that I’m not a net negative on the network

    • Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      1·
      6 hours ago

      Have the popular stuff and you will be sharing.
      Have a look at the size of each entry and multiply by the ratio:

    • printf("%s", name);@piefed.blahaj.zoneOPEnglish
      3·
      11 hours ago

      How: lots of storage, good networking infrastructure, patience
      What: anything that was originally recorded on and not just upscaled to 4K
      Time: my current repertoire of 127 torrents I built in five-six years

    • black0ut@pawb.socialEnglish
      6·
      16 hours ago

      The download isn’t just payload download, it includes the overhead. Even if you only upload, a bit of overhead is always counting towards your download. In practice, this means that the maximum possible ratio you can have is around 32 (meaning, for 32 units uploaded, there’s 1 unit of overhead downloaded). With huge upload sizes, that overhead starts to become relevant.

      • printf("%s", name);@piefed.blahaj.zoneOPEnglish
        6·
        13 hours ago

        This was new to me. Is there more overhead in these torrenting packets than, say, “normal” TCP/UDP traffic? Or do we just not count up/down ratios on normal traffic and we actually do have the same overhead there? I suppose with overhead, we are referring to all the data that is not the actual data portion of the packets, such as the IP/TCP headers?

        • black0ut@pawb.socialEnglish
          5·
          12 hours ago

          I’m not actually an expert on the matter, and there is probably someone who knows more.

          There are 2 protocols that qbittorrent uses for data sharing. The oldest one is basic TCP, with the same overhead. The “newer” (it’s already quite old, too) protocol is µTP. It was specifically designed for p2p purposes, specifically torrents. µTP is, among other things, designed to coexist with other traffic without slowing it down. For this purpose, its packet size is variable. On very small packets, the overhead is big, while on larger packets it’s small. I don’t know how different the average overhead is between the 2 protocols, since those variable packets were designed for shared ADSL. Modern broadband probably allows µTP to use bigger packets most of the time.

          From what I can gather, encryption also adds overhead to the traffic.

          This is, however, not the main source of overhead (I don’t even know if that overhead is really counted, I’d have to look more into it). The main source of overhead is actually control traffic (and that’s the reason why you get download even when only uploading). Peers constantly communicate with each other to form the swarm, and they need to request blocks and announce which blocks they have. As far as I understand, this is the main source of the overhead, and it’s independent from the protocol. Your client will announce to other peers what pieces it has, and its capabilities.

          I also don’t know if tracker traffic is included in the count. Your client sends a status to trackers every n minutes, which are specified by the tracker. Those are called announces. Most trackers have announce times between 30 minutes and 1h. If you have 500 torrents, with an average of 5 trackers per torrent and an average announce time of 45 minutes, you’re sending ~3.3k announces per hour. They don’t take much, but they add up.

          DHT and PeX traffic could also be counted, but as with trackers, I don’t know if it is.

          If you start trying to get higher and higher ratios, you’ll notice there’s an asymptotic curve the higher you go. It really seems impossible to get to 30. I once had a client lose its historical up/down data, and without any download, it stopped at a ratio of around 32. This may be the ratio between upload + upload overhead / download overhead (from the PoV of your client).

          Now, while I don’t have any proof and I don’t know how qbittorrent counts overhead, I suspect all those overheads are counted at the same time. So you’re basically stacking them. This is because of the traffic limiter. If you really want to limit traffic to 100mbps, ideally, you’d count every overhead. If you don’t, you could end up with both an unpredictable amount of traffic, and a higher amount of it than 100mbps. If they already implemented a counter that considers all overhead (basically just counting raw packet data), it would make sense that they used it for the global traffic counter.

    • HuudaHarkiten@piefed.socialEnglish
      3·
      17 hours ago

      I’m by no means a super user, I mostly download movies that are 1-5gb in size. Been on the same tracker since 2015 and I got 1.35TB downloaded.

      • printf("%s", name);@piefed.blahaj.zoneOPEnglish
        3·
        13 hours ago

        This is a really good example of how ratios are nothing but relative. It’s literally in the word itself! 😁 So, there are surely people that have much lower ratios than me for the sole reason that they have downloaded MUCH more and simply not yet seeded for the same amount of time. 😊

        • HuudaHarkiten@piefed.socialEnglish
          3·
          9 hours ago

          My ratio went from 1.9 to 1.15 in a week, because I set up a Jellyfin server for my dad to use :D Had to download a bunch of stuff he would want to watch.

          Totally worth it though, now he doesnt have to watch the Mentalist for the 7th time because for some stupid reason, some stupid TV station executive decided that is the only TV series people want to see. Like seriously, I have never watched that show on my own, but every time I visit my parents, its on the telly. I’ve seen it enough to know there is a Red John (what a stupid name for a villain) who killed the main guys family, the main characters got married (?) but then broke up because apparently it might jeopardize their important po-lice work. It may be a good show, but that stupid telly executive has ruined for me. I love pirating, makes me (and my dad) free of this stupid bullshit.

          Mini rant over.

          • katy ✨@piefed.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            3·
            7 hours ago

            i set up ersatz tv and even made a channel called “for the parents” too so they’ll have something live to watch too :)

            • HuudaHarkiten@piefed.socialEnglish
              1·
              6 hours ago

              Oh that might be a good project to do next!

              I’m currently setting up a headless debian and making it a music streamer, so that my dad can have something to listen to when hes on his walk or bicycle ride. So far hes been okay with Morphe+youtubemusic, but never know when that is gonna stop. Might as well start building a library now.

            • HuudaHarkiten@piefed.socialEnglish
              2·
              6 hours ago

              Now now, lets calm it down :D I have troubles accepting compliments anyway, “hero” is waaaay too much this early in the morning :D

  • Girl Named ZERO@piefed.zeromedia.vipEnglish
    16·
    19 hours ago

    Idk about the buffer size, but the waste is basically when a part of the file you’re downloading gets lost/corrupted so you have to download it twice

    • black0ut@pawb.socialEnglish
      9·
      16 hours ago

      It can also waste some data when a peer disconnects in the middle of sending a block, causing your client to request the block again from zero. The part of the block that was previously received becomes wasted data.

      Additionally, near the end of the download, if a peer is transferring a block really slowly, your client might request it again to a faster peer, causing a bit of waste too.

  • leanleft@lemmy.mlEnglish
    8·
    17 hours ago

    also should appreciate seeders who are the sole seeder for (otherwise) dead/lost torrent

        • CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          2·
          4 hours ago

          Its likely because your VPN is disconnecting and qbit isnt getting restarted when it happens so it just sits there without being able to connect. Adding deunhealth to your stack and having it monitor qbit can help