View Single Post
  #3 (permalink)  
Old May 25th, 2004
stief stief is offline
A reader, not an expert
 
Join Date: January 11th, 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 4,613
stief has a spectacular aura about
Default

a good read--lots to think about. Thanks.

re the crashing---FWIW, I reorganized my shares (4.5 GB; ~1400 files), and then started having start-up problems. Bit the bullet, trashed the fileurns.cache and .bak, waited the 40 mins for them to rehash (thought maybe it would be faster than the 1GB/10 min figure it used to be). The CPU stayed ~35-40 % which is MUCH better than before, and everythings been much quicker since. No data loss, gui slowdowns, etc. Can't say I've seen any error messages though, and it ran for 50 hours this weekend (OSX). So--looks like a new fileurns.cache is good here.

re the 100+ downloads, I can't offer anything similar. Did try 50 plus (small) at a time last week--I guess habits develop because it seemed abusive--but couldn't see any problems other than firewalled (?) hosts that only let one or two at a time through. btw--since the search results now show already downloaded files, I'd forgotten about the old request for the "remember" checkbox.

Sure like your idea of making a block of lots of small files equivalent to a single large file as far assigning upload slots, and preferencing those who request unique files. What about allowing "folder" downloads? The Library can show paths . . . and looks like the Library is on the agenda for the next batch of attention. Yeah! Directory uploads! Should cut the messaging chatter considerably too!

I don't buy your "no Pro" argument though. Sounds more like it should be "Get Pro" so there's more push to get the program developed and fix those bugs--many of which remind me of when Java and OSX were (are) learning to play nicely together. Aren't all of you on XP due for a Java update soon--1.5, isn't it?

cheers
Reply With Quote