NewsLeecher V4.0 Beta 10

Forum to report beta release bugs and discuss the latest beta releases with other users.
• If reporting a beta release bug, be sure read the bug reporting guidelines first.
Forum rules
IMPORTANT : Be sure to read the NewsLeecher forums policy before posting.
p0W3Rh0u5e
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:46 pm

Post by p0W3Rh0u5e »

Just saw this, big rar-sets which have more files than 101 files and use the old naming sheme (*.r??) will have *.s?? files and so on (well, i never saw a set with *.t??-files ;) ). Those s??-files are'nt grouped right: They're counted in the threads topic but shown as single file-posts.... Weird thing is, if you uncollapse the rar-set, those s??-files are shown as member of that thread/group.

p0W3Rh0u5e
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:46 pm

Post by p0W3Rh0u5e »

Spiril wrote:For users who have problems with NewsLeecher temporarily pausing the transfer queue while downloading, pls try this test release:

http://www.newsleecher.com/nluft3.exe

When downloading, using this test release, go to the log tab, and copy the "SAVE DEBUG - Bytes Written..." log lines to the clipboard and paste them to a forum PM message to me. The log lines might help me narrowing down on the problem.
Well, that version did'nt run longer than 3minutes here... It just crashed without a bug report ("stopped responding") before i could copy something from the log.

But my log looks like bballuk's, most articles got written within under a ms, but some (when the pauses occure) take 500-2000ms...

kublai
Posts: 141
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:06 pm

Post by kublai »

I noticed in this version that when you import a nzb file you cannot change the DL directory. It has been taken out till further beta? Is there a reason for taking that out?
Spiril wrote:For users who have problems with NewsLeecher temporarily pausing the transfer queue while downloading, pls try this test release:

http://www.newsleecher.com/nluft3.exe

When downloading, using this test release, go to the log tab, and copy the "SAVE DEBUG - Bytes Written..." log lines to the clipboard and paste them to a forum PM message to me. The log lines might help me narrowing down on the problem.

User avatar
Spiril
Site Admin
Posts: 4278
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:11 am

Re: Same

Post by Spiril »

bballuk wrote:Still getting same problem with Pausing all the time and buy all the time i mean it dont even download it downloads like 1 files the just keeps flashing the message at me.

here the main bit of my log ive change the file names of what i was downloading as it dont know if it against the rules on forum to post that info.

Code: Select all

...
23:31:54 SAVE DEBUG :: Bytes Written: 128,000  ::  Time: 2334.3ms  ::  Per Sec: ~ 0.052 MB.
...
23:31:58 SAVE DEBUG :: Bytes Written: 128,000  ::  Time: 1774.0ms  ::  Per Sec: ~ 0.069 MB.
...
There's the problem. For some reason, NewsLeecher sometimes uses more than 2 seconds to make a simple system file write of 128 KB data to your disk. That's at least ~ 100 times slower than what is normal on an avg. system. Even on my laptop, containing a pretty slow disk, I only see write times below 100ms. Mostly under 25ms for data blocks at 128 KB.

Pretty strange.

A couple of questions:

Does it help if you turn off Repair'n'Extract while downloading?

What kind of disk to you download to? Networked, external?

Do you have any apps running in the background, which could temporarily lock the downloaded NewsLeecher files? That could be some anti virus / anti trojan software or whatever.
bug fixed. no idea how. hate it when that happens. trying to break it again now. will. not. be. defeated.

User avatar
Bags
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2005 11:53 pm
Location: Outer Space

Post by Bags »

Spiril ... Typically .. on a dirtied "typical" home system with other processes running .. this few seconds turns into minutes.

I think biggest issue at the moment is this new temp file system .. it is corrupting data! like my wmv files, for instance. Another reported issues with this. Problem with changing destination during download also. If the temp folder was always the same, there would be no problem.

In a long time, I had to go back to older beta.
Please consider reversal to a common temp folder we can put where we like (considering ini file)

Cheers

User avatar
Spiril
Site Admin
Posts: 4278
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 3:11 am

Post by Spiril »

Bags wrote:I think biggest issue at the moment is this new temp file system .. it is corrupting data! like my wmv files, for instance.
If you PM me with some names of articles that corrupt when getting downloaded, I can probably get it fixed for the next beta.
Bags wrote:Another reported issues with this. Problem with changing destination during download also. If the temp folder was always the same, there would be no problem.
That's going to get sorted before the final release.
Bags wrote:In a long time, I had to go back to older beta.
Please consider reversal to a common temp folder we can put where we like (considering ini file)
The new way of writing downloaded files to the disk is much more efficient as data is only written once instead or two times. But since it's just implemented (in the latest beta) and works differently than the old way of handling disk writes, it still got some bugs. They'll be fixed over the next betas.
bug fixed. no idea how. hate it when that happens. trying to break it again now. will. not. be. defeated.

p0W3Rh0u5e
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:46 pm

Re: Same

Post by p0W3Rh0u5e »

Spiril wrote: There's the problem. For some reason, NewsLeecher sometimes uses more than 2 seconds to make a simple system file write of 128 KB data to your disk. That's at least ~ 100 times slower than what is normal on an avg. system. Even on my laptop, containing a pretty slow disk, I only see write times below 100ms. Mostly under 25ms for data blocks at 128 KB.

Pretty strange.

A couple of questions:

Does it help if you turn off Repair'n'Extract while downloading?
Nope, does'nt make a difference here.
What kind of disk to you download to? Networked, external?
I normally download to a local RAID6-Setup with 8 HDDs, those are connected to a highend 3ware controller with 512BM RAM (which are used as writecache too). Speed is'nt the problem here, really. But i even tried a much more simple and slower RAID1-setup on my intel-controller, no big difference, well wth the intel-sys i get more pauses.

One would'nt expect pausing on that system, right? ;)
You said it, its strange...
Do you have any apps running in the background, which could temporarily lock the downloaded NewsLeecher files? That could be some anti virus / anti trojan software or whatever.
Yeah, thats an interesting idea... I'm currently using Microsoft Security Essentials' realtime-protection.

I'll try what happens when i disable it.

User avatar
bballuk
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:40 am
Location: On Top Of The World

Post by bballuk »

im downloading to a portable hard drive powered by its own power supply and connected to PC by usb but ive downloaded to my main drive and it does the same thing.

there only other programs ive got running in the background is Comodo Firewall and never had a problem with it before unless its been reporting to conflict with newsleecher ive not checked.

oh and still does same with RnE turned off.

User avatar
bballuk
Posts: 57
Joined: Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:40 am
Location: On Top Of The World

Post by bballuk »

Will there be another forum release for this problem with it not downloading anything ive installed 3.9 final over top it still doing it so i need to uninstall everything i might just stick to 3.9 Final intill there a new beta fix or a 4.0 Final

p0W3Rh0u5e
Posts: 176
Joined: Thu Apr 21, 2005 6:46 pm

Re: Same

Post by p0W3Rh0u5e »

p0W3Rh0u5e wrote: Yeah, thats an interesting idea... I'm currently using Microsoft Security Essentials' realtime-protection.

I'll try what happens when i disable it.
Sorry, took a while to get me back to my pc... I've made some tests, with and without MSE but there is no difference at all, i have the same pausing behavior without it.

In addition, i've played around with some caching options (those you'll find in device manager for example), but that did'nt bring any noticeable effect either.

Firestorm ZERO
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:44 am

Post by Firestorm ZERO »

I have problem where it is not marking grouped archives as "queued" or "downloaded" under status column. So it hard to remember if I downloaded the file or not when look through the article list. Works fine for single files.

eg.

[+] Archive -> OK (used to say queued if there is a file queued or downloaded if all files are downloaded in b9)
|-----File 1 -> Downloaded
|-----File 2 -> Queued
|-----PAR 1 -> OK

BlueSteel
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:52 pm

Post by BlueSteel »

Firestorm ZERO wrote:I have problem where it is not marking grouped archives as "queued" or "downloaded" under status column. So it hard to remember if I downloaded the file or not when look through the article list. Works fine for single files.

eg.

[+] Archive -> OK (used to say queued if there is a file queued or downloaded if all files are downloaded in b9)
|-----File 1 -> Downloaded
|-----File 2 -> Queued
|-----PAR 1 -> OK
I have a related problem, if I only download a single file in a grouped archive, the whole grouped archive gets marked as downloaded. If I download a single descriptory file in several groups and fully download several other groups, there is no way of telling the two types apart.

I think groups should have a few more possible statuses, like "Partially downloaded", or simply a list of all contained statuses, like "Downloaded, OK" or even "Downloaded, Queued, OK" like in Firestorm's example.

Firestorm ZERO
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Jul 14, 2009 1:44 am

Post by Firestorm ZERO »

To follow up on my bug, I decided to download the PARs as well to see if it switches status. But after downloading everything in the group set, it still says "OK" under status in top of the grouped set.

Maybe can you add a "Marked as Downloaded" feature under the "More" context menu? Because even if this is fixed in the next/future release, my downloads will most likely still be marked as "OK". Also it is can also be used to mark stuff that I already have.

Lundis2
Posts: 11
Joined: Thu May 14, 2009 10:15 pm

not working at all

Post by Lundis2 »

Well tried beta 11 forum 3.

It doesnt work at all for me. If I queue something it doesnt update the listing. It still list stuff as being none queued.
Also after it downloaded about 100MB it started "wait to write to harddrive pausing queue". And it stuck there.
I really hope you will enable us to disable this new download method.
I can download fine at over 12MB/S with the old system.

Lundis

BlueSteel
Posts: 17
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 3:52 pm

Re: not working at all

Post by BlueSteel »

Lundis2 wrote:Well tried beta 11 forum 3.

It doesnt work at all for me. If I queue something it doesnt update the listing. It still list stuff as being none queued.
Also after it downloaded about 100MB it started "wait to write to harddrive pausing queue". And it stuck there.
I really hope you will enable us to disable this new download method.
I can download fine at over 12MB/S with the old system.

Lundis
I had this problem aswell a few minutes ago, I started a larger download and went away. When I came back, the bots were already disconnected (time-out) and there was that "waiting to write to HDD" overlay flashing on and off the whole time. My download was only 30% done, I assume something triggered that forced queue-pause for HDD access, and it got stuck. I could not even close NL, it was popping up a window saying "Waiting to finish writing to disk" or something like that and refused to close.

I checked the logfile aswell, there was absolutely nothing out of the ordinary there. The logged disk-writes were all normal size and normal speed (0-20ms), and after that I only had the bot-disconnect messages. This is the first time this happened, I restarted NL and the download started over and completed successfully.

Download speed was averaging around 10.5MB/s.

Post Reply