the forums at degreez.net

Hi all

Currently I'm trying to get a setup to push around large files on a
100mbit lan. Thus far I have the tracker working fine, as well as
torrent generation and so forth. This past weekend I had the
opportunity to give my setup a shot.

What I found was that, with 2 computers seeding and three downloading,
none of the uploads ever topped 1mbit per seeder, nor did the download
rates reach expected results. Watching the windows (XP) network
utilization monitor on all machines saw that BT apparently refused to
use more than 6-10% of the available bandwith.

In comparison, a file transfer using windows network neighborhood pegs
the connection at around 60% average, though granted that is just
between two machines.

Just curious about this apparent bottleneck, where exactly it may be
(torrent clients or tracker) and what if anything can be done to
'uncap' things--we were really hoping for network saturation or as
close to it as possible. Both Seeders were running shadow's 5.8.11 via Torrentstorm 1.2.1 and downloaders were using either the same cilent or vanilla bittorrent.

The tracker we were running was 3.4.1a running on the newest version
of Python under WinXP Pro if that makes any difference.

Cheers
-Evan

The tracker version won't make a difference. Try the latest version; I've made some modifications that should improve your speed. Increasing your disk caching may also help.

I'll give Bittornado newest a shot as soon as i get the chance, thanks!


Er, disk caching? You mean windows disk cache or an option in BT?

Well, adjusting Windows' disk cache is difficult; defragging your drives might help a little. BT jumps around on the disk a lot and that can slow things down. A built-in BT-optimized cache is a potential future add-on to my client, but I need to work on the dynamics a bit more before I try implementing such a thing. An improperly designed cache will cause more trouble than it solves.