Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Negative number of Seeders #69

Closed
hce opened this issue Dec 16, 2010 · 4 comments
Closed

Negative number of Seeders #69

hce opened this issue Dec 16, 2010 · 4 comments

Comments

@hce
Copy link

hce commented Dec 16, 2010

When downloading this torrent: http://cdimage.debian.org/debian-cd/5.0.7/amd64/bt-dvd/debian-507-amd64-DVD-4.iso.torrent I saw -10 seeders (negative number) listed in the webui.

@jlouis
Copy link
Owner

jlouis commented Dec 16, 2010

I tried to reproduce this one, and grab the output from the tracker. But the tracker did respond with all positive values that got reflected correctly. Can you reproduce it reliably?

@hce
Copy link
Author

hce commented Dec 16, 2010

No, unfortunately I cannot. The negative value has disappeared in my torrent listing, too. I've seen it three times so far, -10 in every case, each time a debian torrent...

@jlouis
Copy link
Owner

jlouis commented Dec 16, 2010

If it reoccurs, here is what to do:

  1. Install the eper suite with redbug.

  2. Stop the currently running etorrent session, remove all .torrent files from it

  3. Build a remote node for query

    erl -name 'rb@127.0.0.1' -remsh 'etorrent@127.0.0.1' -setcookie etorrent
    
  4. Redbug the response handler from the tracker

redbug:start("etorrent_tracker_communication:handle_tracker_response/4",
                  [{time, 60000}]).
  1. Add the torrent.
  2. See if the tracker response has negative values.

Of course this narrowing won't work if it is even more flaky. I could add a guard on the counts perhaps as an alternative.

@jlouis
Copy link
Owner

jlouis commented Dec 17, 2011

This one is too old that I care for it anymore. The code in and around that base has been changed a lot, so I don't expect the problem to be the same in any case. Closing.

@jlouis jlouis closed this as completed Dec 17, 2011
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants