| LinHES Forums http://forum.linhes.org/ |
|
| TorrentFlux http://forum.linhes.org/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=17163 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Gibble [ Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | TorrentFlux |
Thanks to the great script by chrisj (http://www.mysettopbox.tv/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=14399) I was easily able to install and setup torrentflux on my myth box, it's working but it's SLOOOOOOW. Code: Current Download: 11.50 kB/s
Current Upload: 13.50 kB/s Free Space: 111.58 GB Server Load: 1.21 The box is behind a router...do I need to forward more ports or something? Why is it this slow? Thanks, -C |
|
| Author: | rando [ Fri Nov 02, 2007 8:43 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
How many seeders/leechers on the torrent you posted stats for? If you fire up the same torrent on another box that has an already configured torrent client (and the proper ports forwarded, etc) what kind of speeds do you see? |
|
| Author: | Gibble [ Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
About 1000 seeders, using the btdownloadcurses on the command line it runs faster, granted, it's only ~20K/s but that's faster than the ~5 I get in flux. |
|
| Author: | rando [ Tue Nov 06, 2007 10:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I don't have torrentflux installed anywhere at the moment, but earlier in the year I was running it and didn't have any trouble gettings speeds up in the 200-300k/sec range. Aside from double checking to make sure your ports are forwarded properly, I don't really know what else to suggest. |
|
| Author: | Gibble [ Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've been doing research, it appears torrentflux runs on ports 49160-49300 (not 6881-6999)...this machine is behind my router, a dlink DI-524, Under "Applications" I added two triggers (TCP): Code: Trigger Public
6881 6881-6999 49160 49160-49300 This I thought would speed things up...but it doesn't seem to. |
|
| Author: | Liv2Cod [ Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Well, torrentflux CAN push a lot of traffic when it is called for. I seeded a new version of Suse awhile ago just to see. I hit over 60Mbits/sec for an hour, and sustained >40Mbits/sec for about a day. My Myth-related seeds have never hit those rates, tho. Best I've seen is about 10Mbits/sec for an hour here and there. More typical is 200-500Kbits/sec. for a few hours at a time. |
|
| Author: | Anaerin [ Sat Jun 21, 2008 11:46 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I used to use TorrentFlux, but I found all those Python processes (And the fact it was running under Apache, used the filesystem for communication, didn't have global speed settings, and wouldn't restart torrents automatically) made it horrible to use. Then I discovered BTG (http://btg.berlios.de). It has a VERY nice web-based frontend, supports multiple users, global bandwidth limits, DHT and encryption, and it's fast and lean, running as a single process rather than lost of individual python processes. The prerequesites are a bit of a hassle (Needs Rasterbar libtorrent, which in turn requires libboost), but once you've got those sorted, it's very easy to set up and use. Any chance of this being included in the next version of KnoppMyth? |
|
| Author: | Liv2Cod [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 10:58 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
Anaerin wrote: I used to use TorrentFlux, but I found all those Python processes ... made it horrible to use.
Just as an aside, processes are NOT "bad". Python has some support for threading, but spawning off separate processes in Python is a good design decision. If you take a look at "ps -ef" you'll see your linux box is running quite a few processes already! |
|
| Author: | cliffsjunk [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 12:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
You generally DO have to poke holes in your firewall for bittorrent, else you get very low download rates. This might be described as "port forwarding", "virtual server", etc in your router setup. Find out exactly which ports your client uses and set up your router / firewall to forward those to the box that you want to run the bittorrent client on. I have two boxes running various OS's and clients and so I have configured one box to use 6881-6889 and the other box to use 6890-6899. I did this by configuring both the bittorrent client software on the boxes and the port forwarding setup in the router. Once you do this it looks like those ports are directly sitting on the internet instead of inside of a NAT-LAN. Another possibility is that some routers have an option to basically do this for all ports of one PC at a time. Not recommended as it leaves more of an "attack surface" exposed. Cliff |
|
| Author: | elgordo123 [ Sun Jun 22, 2008 1:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I use torrenflux too. I found that forwarding the ports to my knoppmyth box speeds it up immensly. Much faster than azureus, for sure. What I do is start a torrent downloading and then see what port it is using, I then connect into my D-Link DI-624 router and forward that port to my myth box. After about 2 minutes the speed jumps WAY up. (My DI-624 only allows one port at a time, not a range, so I have to do it this way). Haven't touched azureus since. |
|
| Author: | Anaerin [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 2:37 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Liv2Cod wrote: Anaerin wrote: I used to use TorrentFlux, but I found all those Python processes ... made it horrible to use. Just as an aside, processes are NOT "bad". Python has some support for threading, but spawning off separate processes in Python is a good design decision. If you take a look at "ps -ef" you'll see your linux box is running quite a few processes already! Oh, I know processes aren't bad. But when downloading 2 torrents was taking 100% CPU usage for 12Kb/s transfer rate, I knew something had to give. It's the fact that the version of TorrentFlux I was running at the time (I don't know about the current release) was using the Python interpreted version of the BitTorrent client, which was slow and resource intensive, and it was calling that client using cli within Apache (A bad move, security-wise). Still, I'm happier now. Or would be if BTG and LibTorrent weren't going through an overhaul at the moment. :/ |
|
| Author: | manicmike [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 3:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Have you tried bittornado? I've been using it for a few years now (disclaimer: for legal downloads only), and find it very easy and nice to my CPUs. It's also python based. Mike |
|
| Author: | Liv2Cod [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 4:03 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
manicmike wrote: Have you tried bittornado?
You'd like Torrentflux, then. It's a web-based frontend for... drum roll... bittornado! |
|
| Author: | mihanson [ Mon Jun 23, 2008 5:52 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I've been using Torrentflux-b4rt on my MBE for quite a while now (> 1yr?) and I've been quite happy with it. More features than I'll ever need. It just serves up the most recent KM release and gets the occasional software app or iso image. It's been solid as a rock. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|