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

Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ

65119 readers
730 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
db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
sunbrothersco@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
RandomLegend@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Andromxda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
tenchiken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
unruffled@anarchist.nexus
26
High disk read compared to seeding speed (lemmy.today)
submitted 3 weeks ago by LodeMike@lemmy.today to c/piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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 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.