Free the slot every 100MB

[mai9]

I know there's an upload queue on works. but what about a feature that denies (for 10 seconds) the slot to a user that has downloaded 100MB (or whatever) in a row?

Would this be very complex to program? Maybe this is a quick and dirt feature only for mods?

Well, you clearly see that the object of this feature would be to distribute the slots to more people. It's not perfect, but theoretically DC++ only has to stockpile MB transfered for every user who is currently using a slot. When he makes 100MB, DC++ stops the user for 10 seconds, enough time for other users to claim that slot. If nobody claims it, the first user regains the slot and download continues.

I hope this idea didn't come up before in the countless threads on leeching

[Twink]

Similar ideas have been suggested before, there is the possibility of problems when it comes to download speeds, a person on a 56k modem will take alot longer to download 100MB then a person on t3 to download the whole file. I guess this would be fixed with multiple slots and a open a slot if speed below feature, but not entirely sure.

[dieselmachine]

since dc clients tend to 'ping' prospective sources every 50 seconds or so (i think), 10 seconds isnt a very good window of opportunity for someone to jump in. i'd suggest a minute. thats what i used, and it worked out great.

[XmothX]

can we see this client of yours, sounds really good for a hubowner.

[jbyrd]

This feature doesn't appeal to me...at all.

Take a 600mb movie on a 3 slot uploader, for example.

Just say that it takes 4 hours for me to download 100 mb. If I get in on the queue early and secure a slot for myself, I should be done in 1 day. If three other people were getting that same movie at the same speed, three different people have the download per day.

However, lets say that the 100mb restriction is put into play, and 6 people are alternating slots. I download for an hour, and someone else downloads for an hour. You do this enough, and you'll get 6 people getting the download in 2 days.

Now, the average in both cases is 3 people a day, but it takes me 2 days to download it instead of 1 day.

Since I jumped in on the queue first, I should get first service. That's how I feel.

Now, quickly, throw some slower connections into the picture, say half as fast. Now, I don't get mine until there's is done...4 DAYS. I could have downloaded it in 1 day. Throw some 56k's in there and you have some serious horse crap.

I think this feature would only hurt the plusplus community.
Please don't incorporate it into dc.

[mai9]

If I get in on the queue early and secure a slot for myself, I should be done in 1 day.
[...]
Since I jumped in on the queue first, I should get first service. That's how I feel.

You are assuming that you get a slot. What if you don't get it?

[dieselmachine]

only check if the user is over the session limit upon completion of an upload. then you get the 600 Mb movie, and wont tie up the line for other people who want to download.

[jbyrd]

You are assuming that you get a slot. What if you don't get it?

Then I respect that and wait...or get it from someone else. I would hate to see dc++ become some kind of socialist b.s. where everyone has to have equal access to a slot, whether it's taken or not.

only check if the user is over the session limit upon completion of an upload. then you get the 600 Mb movie, and wont tie up the line for other people who want to download.

By this you mean that you could only get one download at a time? If that's what you mean, that's a better compromise, but I still like it the way it is. There are plenty of people to download from, and if I find someone that has a good connection before others do, then I should get my download first.

Sometimes, though, people do grab a slot from someone that is inbetween downloads. If they are pinging at the right time, they get the slot because inbetween downloads the slot is open temporarily.

[/quote]

[dieselmachine]

You like it the way it is because everything you're talking about is related directly to your personal gain. For those who exist on the DC network as 'takers', a session limit would of course fuck you over. However, keep in mind that some of us are here primarily to share, and make sure everyone gets a shot at our files.

I share 350 gig of heavy metal mp3s on my hub. Without a session limit, my slots fill up, and no one lets go. They'd stay connected for days if i let them. That's not fair to everyone else in the hub. I see your viewpoint on the subject, and i think it's sad that you're so gung-ho with your 'Fuck other people, i got here first' attitude.

Oh well. Good thing the session limit is on the upload side. ;-]

[jbyrd]

Look, I'm not one of those people that will download 400 mp3's back to back, but I sure as hell don't want some kind of session limiter that's going to give my slot to someone else on a 56k. It's not fair. Period.
If you're worried about people downloading for days, what about these slow connections? Once you come up with a solution for this then maybe the feature will be usable...but until then it just won't happen.

It's a shame that you think I'm some kind of mooch. I would have you know that I upload more than 30x what I download. I share 360gb of avi s. My slots are always full...always. But I don't really feel sorry for those waiting because it's first come, first served.

it's sad that you're so gung-ho with your 'Fuck other people, i got here first' attitude.

Sounds to me like you have a FUCK OTHER PEOPLE THAT DON'T AGREE WITH ME attitude. Maybe if you argued the facts and didn't make insulting assumptions about the people you're opposed to then they would make more of an effort to see your side of the issue. Until then...

[GargoyleMT]

Since I jumped in on the queue first, I should get first service. That's how I feel.

As seen above, that may be your view, but it's not the only one (in my opinion, of course). Turnover in slots would be a good thing. You are relying on the charity of the person sharing the files... If he has this tool (per-slot transfer limits) available and chooses to use it, it's his choice and you should respect it, even if you wouldn't act similarly.

Nothing you said in that post contradicts what I said, but it's still worth saying.

[jbyrd]

If he has this tool (per-slot transfer limits) available and chooses to use it, it's his choice and you should respect it, even if you wouldn't act similarly.

I may have to deal with it, but I don't have to respect it. Imagine, my friend, if there was an upload speed limiter that was set to max uploads at 500b/s. Sure, I have to deal with it, but I will hate it.