Talk:Sequential downloading is bad

From VuzeWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

People are really stupid[edit]

People are really stupid. It's one thing to say you want to watch episode 1 immediately and only download that (which after it's completed, you should download the rest of the entire season or whatever at once), but to download songs or movie pieces in sequential order? What does this accomplish besides hurting everybody else? Computer illiterate people I guess just think it's weird that the movie is downloaded randomly, and for some OCDish reason don't want it to do that. Too bad, the rest of us would rather download a movie in 1 hour than to sit there wondering if the last pieces will ever be available.

" What does this accomplish besides hurting everybody else? " For one, it allows you to preview a small fifty megabyte section of a multi gigabyte sized file. When downloading a movie with unknown characteristics, it is helpful to know whether the media meets your requirements before downloading gigabytes worth of unneeded data. I guess this behavior does encourage people to download a bit and leave, not giving back to the swarm, but its a hell of a lot better than downloading a major portion, or the whole portion, of the torrent only to have the media deleted as not what the downloader wanted, depriving people of a seed who himself sucked up a large portion of the seeding capacity. I ran into something like this recently. I'm downloading a 3 gig file and I don't want it if it doesn't have english audio. I don't know at the moment, and I'm 500MB into it. If it turns out not to, I'm not sticking around to give back what I received. It would be great if uploaders/commenters would list torrent characteristics, like whether it has subtitles, what language, what quality, et cet, but this doesn't happen usually. Its hardly computer illiterate to wish to know what your downloading before wasting the seeding capacity of the swarm.--71.66.109.95 16:22, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
previewing is hardly related to sequential downloading. with the proper tools you can preview any parts of the media file, check if there's a subtitle stream, multiple audio streams or whatever. --The8472 13:07, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Previous autor was very very embittered on humanity, he is wrong[edit]

if the humanity is really so stupid as previous autor says, we should still live in caves and live in revenge law.

anyway the situation that was described where all peers follows only own interests is imho not adecvate to real situation - in reality torrents are provided by comunity of seeders, that must be always present and share it, if it is not - torrent is dead.

torrent ofcouse can be shared even by avaricious peers described before, but with this peers it not stable and liveness - it will dead just at a moment when shutdown last seeder.

for the normal peoples it is normaly that some peers are stay on seeding. so i not see big trouble to sequental downloading here - for constantly demanded torrent is helps people to faster use it contents, and less demanded torrents - wich are not shared by normal seeders - just die faster.

to illustrate the nonsence of suggestion "seq downloading is bad" i must hyperbolise it - if it is bad idea to allow peoples to choose what file of torrent(piece of swarm) should be downloaded first, then maybe it is bad idea to allow peoples to any chose what they are should download? maybe better to create world-wide-torrent that contain whole worlds data, and all peoples should peer\seed all it content, and so every body will have participate in a torrent sharing. and this is will be a fairness limit, and a problem of avaricious peers disapear.

My reasons for doing it[edit]

I have used bittorrent for many years (since bittorrent 3 mainline), and studied how it works and followed Bram's mailing list so i knew beforehand exactly what the issues of messing the order of pieces were since the beginning. At first, torrents were about sharing single files, now we have multi-gigabyte shares spawning whole series or entire collections, you can't realistically expect people to download the whole thing which could take months without a chance to watch/listen a little. As you already admit, people "abuse" the "do not download" thing.

Lets go micro: Why download a 24min episode with pieces in order instead of the usual common first, then rares until finished approach? Suppose it would take 20 minutes to download that way, but 30 minutes by messing the priority to attempt downloading the pieces in order. Well, after just 5 minutes or so in the download, using the ordered pieces approach you can open the video and usually watch it to the end uninterrupted instead of waiting the whole 20 minutes using the more efficient method, and then spending 24 MORE minutes watching. See the issue? People have real lives, and they need their time NOW.

This also has the unintended effect of people leaving the torrent running longer (seeding), since when you start watching the video, you can't afford to stop the download because there are remaining pieces you still need, but now you are distracted watching the video even when it finishes downloading in the background. With the classic approach, a selfish person will leave the swarm as soon as the download is completed and THEN watch the video. Also, downloading pieces in order tends to alleviate the "do not download" abuse thing, since the episodes are being downloaded in order anyway, there is no need to allow them one by one; it is better to have a low chance than no chance.

There are various clients allowing this, and a nice patch by Bogdan Harjoc i use with Vuze/Azureus. I'm even puzzled why you never considered adding this option, since to me the whole Vuze thing seemed to be a youtube of sorts; one might think you actually wanted to "stream" the video instead of making people wait for the whole thing before playback.