this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
26 points (100.0% liked)

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

65040 readers
104 users here now

⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.

Rules • Full Version

1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy

2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote

3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs

4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others



Loot, Pillage, & Plunder

📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):

🏴‍☠️ Other communities

FUCK ADOBE!

Torrenting/P2P:

Gaming:


💰 Please help cover server costs.

Ko-Fi Liberapay
Ko-fi Liberapay

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.today/post/39908979

Hi, I'm having a problem with my qBittorrent setup that I can't quite debug or find information on.

I'm seeding from a hard drive and I get something like 5-15 MBps of seeding capacity depending on the day. However I noticed upon inspecting a system monitor (I am running Debian 13) the total disk IO read was about 4x the seeding speed.

I've tweaked the advanced settings all I can to no avail. I am using the version of QBit from Devian 13 main. It's 5.Something.

Would anyone have insight on this problem? I'll take anything at this point. The application is using about 250MB of RAM.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 10 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Total speed is going to be bottlenecked somewhere, which could be drive read speed, upload bandwidth, or the peer's download speed, their write speed, or any number of other factors.

If your side is capable, don't worry too much about it. You could be seeding to someone on their phone in a shack in remote Mongolia. That's never going to be fast.

Also, reset all the advanced options back to default. You don't need to touch any of them, and changing things might make it worse.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Yeah but youd think I would fill some sort kf buffer up eventually, if I'm limited by bandwidth, right?

Am I actually just limited by DiskIO so I'm always behind? My memory usage is around 250MB.

[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

No. There's no point in filling more than the protocol buffers if you can't empty them. Loading a huge file into memory that won't be used right away is a waste.

You've already said your read speeds are better. Memory usage doesn't seem relevant here.

load more comments (1 replies)