[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full download
From: |
Pierre Etchemaite |
Subject: |
Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other |
Date: |
Tue, 24 Dec 2002 10:50:24 +0100 |
Le Tue, 24 Dec 2002 01:56:21 +0100, Martin <address@hidden> a écrit :
(Sorry if I'm replying to that post, I couldn't find the post it's referring
to...)
> MLdonkey wrote...
> > ) (if c.client_source_for = [] then !current_files
> > else c.client_source_for);
> >
> > and tell me if your downloads are improved...
(Is that the "major bugfix" of the latest CVS commit ?)
Well, that doesn't look too good:
* it looks hackish, "if we don't know what this source is good for, ask for
everything", unless you can explain cases were it is the only thing mldonkey
can do;
* it will flood Lugdunum servers' test connections just as well as the plain
List.iter (...) !current-files
* here's how I think unknown incoming peers are greeted, tell me if my
expectations are wrong:
- when they connect, query_files is called; since the peer is not
known to be the source of anything, file requests aren't sent, and the
client_last_filereqs timer is not updated
- hopefully the incoming peer, at least, knows why it connected for, so it
sends its filerequests
- that calls add_new_location, that adds the file requested to the
client_source_for, and calls query_files again(*), so the first
filerequest, at least, is immediately echoed. Is it fine to send
filerequests at that time ?
(*) oops, that was removed from my code ;)
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] New source management, (continued)
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] New source management, Joseph, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, fulldownloads for the other, René Gallati, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, fulldownloads for the other, MLdonkey, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, fulldownloads for the other, René Gallati, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, fulldownloads for the other, MLdonkey, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, fulldownloads for the other, René Gallati, 2002/12/25
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, Fabian Henrici, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, Fabian Henrici, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, MLdonkey, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, Martin, 2002/12/23
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other,
Pierre Etchemaite <=
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, MLdonkey, 2002/12/24
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Investigation: No download for some, full downloads for the other, Pierre Etchemaite, 2002/12/24
- [Mldonkey-users] Need a prompt in telnet interface, Michael Panteleit, 2002/12/25
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Need a prompt in telnet interface, Taros666, 2002/12/25
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Need a prompt in telnet interface, Michael Panteleit, 2002/12/25
- [Mldonkey-users] Traffic shaping, Sergio Bayarri Gausi, 2002/12/25
- AW: [Mldonkey-users] Traffic shaping, Roland Praml, 2002/12/25
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Need a prompt in telnet interface, Carl Lobo, 2002/12/25
- Re: [Mldonkey-users] Need a prompt in telnet interface, Michael Panteleit, 2002/12/26
- [Mldonkey-users] output of client_stats, Michael Panteleit, 2002/12/26