Sensible hash priority after a crash

[kluelos]

When BitComet crashes and gets restarted (which happens altogether too often), it should use the file size and downloaded size to determine the order in which it is going to do its hash checks on the downloads that were in progress.

As it is, if there's one large, hairy torrent in progress, BitComet will hold up all of the others waiting for however long it takes, for that hash-check to complete. Meanwhile, all the other, much smaller tasks wait and do nothing until the huge one is complete. They could have been downloading all this time if they had been checked first.

There is no point to this waste of time. Hash checks should be done in the way that will get the most tasks actually downloading again in the shortest time.

[The UnUsual Suspect]

Good point, utorrent does this too, and takes even longer to do the hash check from my experience.

I think if the smaller tasks were hashchecked first, it would allow the downloading to resume, then the large tasks could be hashchecked after the small ones have resumed downloading.

[greywizard]

I like this idea.

If the team found the time to implement it, that could help a lot in many cases.

It just seems we piled a lot of suggestions on the team in the last half-year but with all this VIP/VIPA development rush, those probably have to stay somewhere lower on the priority queue.

But I, for one, certainly like the suggestion.

[OnlyTheShadow]

Hash-check order by size has been requested since 2011. Looks to me like this has not been considered since then. I wish to put forth this suggestion again. Why has this not been implemented in the past 3 years? It seems to me that inserting the sort routine on startup, after determining that hash-check is required, would not be that onerous.

[The UnUsual Suspect]

I believe there was a change made where you can disable auto hash check when files changed. This is helpful if you have been saving to an external drive that was removed all the torrents will be flagged to hash check, so this feature is nice. It can also be used to let you manually do the rehashes one at a time in any order you like.

If you review the release notes over the past few years you should be able to find the changes.