Use Fine Grained File Priorities #16108

Open
opened 2026-02-22 02:48:22 -05:00 by deekerman · 36 comments
Owner

Originally created by @ZeroNanuk on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024).

Suggestion

I would like to request a feature that was present in utorrent when you download a torrent that is a batch file like a season of a tv show or anime you can prioritize the episodes to download in order (1->22). It was a feature called "Use Fine Grained File Priorities"

As of now in a batch file the Download Priority options are only Normal, High and Maximum. This will only let you priroritize the first and second episode in a season, which means if you go to sleep and the download is slow you only get the first two episodes when you wake up. In utorrent it's 1-15 if I'm not mistaken. So you can potentially get at least half if not the first 15 episodes when you wake up.

Use case

For downloading batch file torrents in order (tv show seasons, movie trilogies, anime season, etc.) in order of episode number.

Extra info/examples/attachments

7Bu6I

FineGrained

Originally created by @ZeroNanuk on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024). ### Suggestion I would like to request a feature that was present in utorrent when you download a torrent that is a batch file like a season of a tv show or anime you can prioritize the episodes to download in order (1->22). It was a feature called "Use Fine Grained File Priorities" As of now in a batch file the Download Priority options are only Normal, High and Maximum. This will only let you priroritize the first and second episode in a season, which means if you go to sleep and the download is slow you only get the first two episodes when you wake up. In utorrent it's 1-15 if I'm not mistaken. So you can potentially get at least half if not the first 15 episodes when you wake up. ### Use case For downloading batch file torrents in order (tv show seasons, movie trilogies, anime season, etc.) in order of episode number. ### Extra info/examples/attachments ![7Bu6I](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c72e2556-f6f3-41a3-b73c-2688e0a9f2ba) ![FineGrained](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d11f1a15-ee43-43ce-b750-a81b837677b2)
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024):

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024): Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?
Author
Owner

@qBittUser commented on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024):

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

Downloading random pieces of each file and allowing to prioritize by file name or any other order might be quicker to get torrent completed and would be better for swarm health than current sequential.

Some *.torrent files have pieces of files optimized and not by folder or filename order, so unfortunately current sequential download option isn't good enough.

If the current Download in sequential order in Torrent Options doesn't guarantee to download files by name order or if it's actually overriding or conflicting with Download first and last piece or individual file priorities, then it should be named Download pieces in sequential order, unless it is actually always guaranteed to ignore custom individual file priorities and download files alphabetically.

So better wording, tooltips or more options to control what to ignore, honor or prioritize is necessary to avoid misunderstanding.

Some related issues and feature requests:

@qBittUser commented on GitHub (Sep 30, 2024): > Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this? Downloading random pieces of each file and allowing to prioritize by file name or any other order might be quicker to get torrent completed and would be better for swarm health than current sequential. Some *.torrent files have pieces of files optimized and not by folder or filename order, so unfortunately current sequential download option isn't good enough. If the current `Download in sequential order` in Torrent Options doesn't guarantee to download files by name order or if it's actually overriding or conflicting with `Download first and last piece` or individual file priorities, then it should be named `Download pieces in sequential order`, unless it is actually always guaranteed to `ignore custom individual file priorities and download files alphabetically`. So better wording, tooltips or more options to control what to ignore, honor or prioritize is necessary to avoid misunderstanding. **Some related issues and feature requests:** * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/19365 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/19364 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/19042 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/19032 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/16925 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/16845 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/16387 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/16201 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/15892 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/7078 * https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/issues/6532
Author
Owner

@ZeroNanuk commented on GitHub (Oct 1, 2024):

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

image

Its would if it worked for me.

I named the request "Use Fine Grained File Priorities" which is the option in utorrent that allows to download the files in the order you prioritize, because I've yet to see a feature that looks at the file names and do it automatically by episode number.

@ZeroNanuk commented on GitHub (Oct 1, 2024): > Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this? ![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/515885bf-c88d-4457-a579-30021357b1b7) Its would if it worked for me. I named the request "Use Fine Grained File Priorities" which is the option in utorrent that allows to download the files in the order you prioritize, because I've yet to see a feature that looks at the file names and do it automatically by episode number.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Oct 1, 2024):

Its would if it worked for me.

It totally works. Just configure the Torrent Queueing properly (or disable it completely) and stop abusing the Force Start button.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Oct 1, 2024): > Its would if it worked for me. It totally works. Just configure the `Torrent Queueing` properly (or disable it completely) and stop abusing the `Force Start` button.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025):

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

No... Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum. That is not really useful at all if you have more than 3 files, even if the files happen to sort properly.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025): > Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this? No... Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum. That is not really useful at all if you have more than 3 files, even if the files happen to sort properly.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025):

Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum.

What? It does not assign anything. In fact, it doesn't even care about files, it just downloads pieces sequentially, as represented by the progress bar.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025): > Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum. What? It does not assign anything. In fact, it doesn't even care about files, it just downloads pieces sequentially, as represented by the progress bar.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025):

Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum.

What? It does not assign anything. In fact, it doesn't even care about files, it just downloads pieces sequentially, as represented by the progress bar.

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025): > > Sequential is only able to assign Normal, High and Maximum. > > What? It does not assign anything. In fact, it doesn't even care about files, it just downloads pieces sequentially, as represented by the progress bar. It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025):

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 14, 2025): > It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI. No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client.
Author
Owner

@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

ANNOUNCEMENT!

For anybody coming across this "Feature Request" & would like/love to see a potential implementation in the future!
Here are some options available to you:

  1. Please select/click the 👍 &/orreactions in the original/opening post of this ticket.

  2. Please feel free (If you have the "skillset") to create a "Pull Request" implementing what's being requested in this ticket.
    (new/existing contributors/developers are always welcome)


DO:

  • Provide constructive feedback.
  • Display how other projects implemented same/similar etc.

DO NOT:

  • Add a "Bump", "me too", "2nd/3rd" etc. or "criticizing" comment(s).
    (These will be disregarded/hidden as "spam/abuse/off-topic" etc. as they don't provide anything constructive.)
@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): ## ANNOUNCEMENT! For anybody coming across this **_"Feature Request"_** & would like/love to see a potential implementation in the future! **Here are some options available to you:** 1. Please select/click the 👍 **&/or** ❤ `reactions` in the original/opening post of this ticket. 2. Please feel free _(If you have the "skillset")_ to create a **_"Pull Request"_** implementing what's being requested in this ticket. **_(new/existing contributors/developers are always welcome)_** ____ **DO:** * Provide constructive feedback. * Display how other projects implemented same/similar etc. **DO NOT:** * Add a "Bump", "me too", "2nd/3rd" etc. or "criticizing" comment(s). **(These will be disregarded/hidden as "spam/abuse/off-topic" etc. as they don't provide anything constructive.)**
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client.

I'm referring to uTorrent. You typically right click several files and click "Prioritize by File Order" and the Priority column changes to numbers, assuming the "Fine Grained Priorities" option it turned on in Options.

Perhaps you never activated the options for this to work.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): > > It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI. > > No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client. I'm referring to uTorrent. You typically right click several files and click "Prioritize by File Order" and the Priority column changes to numbers, assuming the "Fine Grained Priorities" option it turned on in Options. Perhaps you never activated the options for this to work.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client.

https://1drv.ms/f/c/e7918d36eb43623f/Elpsdxuwb39NjLf5vAYOJuUBewJFLqNxqj8z7XfU5P8Q4Q?e=fLGJp8

Here's some screenshots of uTorrent to prove the fine grained options are there, and they are not based even on filename or file order. You select one or multiple files, and you can literally change a certain set of files to totally different orders, and not just the "high, medium, low" that qbittorrent allows.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): > > It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI. > > No it's not. Maybe you've confused it with some other client. https://1drv.ms/f/c/e7918d36eb43623f/Elpsdxuwb39NjLf5vAYOJuUBewJFLqNxqj8z7XfU5P8Q4Q?e=fLGJp8 Here's some screenshots of uTorrent to prove the fine grained options are there, and they are not based even on filename or file order. You select one or multiple files, and you can literally change a certain set of files to totally different orders, and not just the "high, medium, low" that qbittorrent allows.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

I'm referring to uTorrent.

Why? Just in case, this is a qBittorrent repo, so I'm talking about it. I don't know and don't care what uTorrent does.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): > I'm referring to uTorrent. Why? Just in case, this is a qBittorrent repo, so I'm talking about it. I don't know and don't care what uTorrent does.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

I'm referring to uTorrent.

Why? Just in case, this is a qBittorrent repo, so I'm talking about it. I don't know and don't care what uTorrent does.

Because the OP is literally asking for "I would like to request a feature that was present in utorrent when you download a torrent that is a batch file."

UTORRENT

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): > > I'm referring to uTorrent. > > Why? Just in case, this is a qBittorrent repo, so I'm talking about it. I don't know and don't care what uTorrent does. Because the OP is literally asking for "I would like to request a feature that was present in utorrent when you download a torrent that is a batch file." UTORRENT
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

So what? I was talking about qBittorrent option here

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

You answered me

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

Which is simply not true for qBittorrent.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): So what? **I** was talking about qBittorrent option here > Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this? You answered **me** > It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI. Which is simply **not true** for qBittorrent.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

So what? I was talking qbout qBittorrent option here

Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this?

You answered me

I was speaking in the context of the entire request. And I clarified I meant uTorrent. Why are you trying to be difficult?

It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI.

Which is simply not true for qBittorrent.

I am trying to show you what the OP actually is asking for. Obviously, the OP isn't asking for what qBitTorrent currently does, or it wouldn't be a feature request.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): > So what? **I** was talking qbout qBittorrent option here > > > Isn't simply using the sequential option better than this? > > You answered **me** I was speaking in the context of the entire request. And I clarified I meant uTorrent. Why are you trying to be difficult? > > It literally changes the priorities on the files in the UI. > > Which is simply **not true** for qBittorrent. I am trying to show you what the OP actually is asking for. Obviously, the OP isn't asking for what qBitTorrent currently does, or it wouldn't be a feature request.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025):

I know what the OP is asking for. I said that existing qBittorrent sequential download option is just better than any priority shenanegans.
I.e. what uTorrent does is garbage in my opinion. That's it.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (May 25, 2025): I know what the OP is asking for. I said that existing **qBittorrent** sequential download option is just better than any priority shenanegans. I.e. what uTorrent does is garbage in my opinion. That's it.
Author
Owner

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

I know what the OP is asking for. I said that existing qBittorrent sequential download option is just better than any priority shenanegans. I.e. what uTorrent does is garbage in my opinion. That's it.

This is just objectively false.
Sequential downloading and priority are NOT the same thing. Priority should prioritise individual files within the torrent. Sequential downloading should NOT mean the entire torrent is sequentially downloaded, it can apply to individual files or all files.

Image

Notice how in this Tixati example I can both priorities all files by a custom ordering sequence, and only sequentially download items 2 and 6. Forcing sequential download on the entire torrent is garbage because prioritising the pieces with the lowest availability has a better chance of keeping the torrent OR file alive and it can be more efficient to download, so it should be used when you don't need to sequentially download certain files.

I would prefer to use qBittorrent as its OSS, but lacking this capability is what is keeping me using Tixati. I have thumbed this issue up to show support for the feature.

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > I know what the OP is asking for. I said that existing **qBittorrent** sequential download option is just better than any priority shenanegans. I.e. what uTorrent does is garbage in my opinion. That's it. This is just objectively false. Sequential downloading and priority are *NOT* the same thing. Priority should prioritise individual files within the torrent. Sequential downloading should *NOT* mean the entire torrent is sequentially downloaded, it can apply to individual files or all files. <img width="918" height="800" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/59da1d62-4fa6-4797-800d-971403c85ca6" /> Notice how in this Tixati example I can both priorities all files by a custom ordering sequence, and only sequentially download items 2 and 6. Forcing sequential download on the entire torrent is garbage because prioritising the pieces with the lowest availability has a better chance of keeping the torrent *OR* file alive and it can be more efficient to download, so it should be used when you don't need to sequentially download certain files. I would prefer to use qBittorrent as its OSS, but lacking this capability is what is keeping me using Tixati. I have thumbed this issue up to show support for the feature.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@KieranDevvs I don't think you understand.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @KieranDevvs I don't think you understand.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

Sequential downloading and priority are NOT the same thing.

I never said it's the same. I said that sequential priority is useless imo.

I would prefer to use qBittorrent as its OSS

Exactly. So if someone wants such functionality, they should go and implement it.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > Sequential downloading and priority are _NOT_ the same thing. I never said it's the same. I said that sequential priority is useless imo. > I would prefer to use qBittorrent as its OSS Exactly. So if someone wants such functionality, they should go and implement it.
Author
Owner

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

Sequential downloading and priority are NOT the same thing.

I never said it's the same. I said that sequential priority is useless imo.

You clearly said the following:

sequential download option is just better than any priority

They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion.

Exactly. So if someone wants such functionality, they should go and implement it.

Feature requests are a way to gauge community interest and document needs. If we limit the conversation only to those currently available to program, we lose out on perspectives that improve the software for everyone. I’m happy to help refine the requirements so that the task is 'ready for dev' for whoever (not just you or I) takes it on.

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > > Sequential downloading and priority are _NOT_ the same thing. > > I never said it's the same. I said that sequential priority is useless imo. You clearly said the following: >sequential download option is just better than any priority They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion. >Exactly. So if someone wants such functionality, they should go and implement it. Feature requests are a way to gauge community interest and document needs. If we limit the conversation only to those currently available to program, we lose out on perspectives that improve the software for everyone. I’m happy to help refine the requirements so that the task is 'ready for dev' for *whoever* (not just you or I) takes it on.
Author
Owner

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@KieranDevvs I don't think you understand.

Happy to discuss more to further this feature and increase clarity, what is it that you think I don't understand?

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > [@KieranDevvs](https://github.com/KieranDevvs) I don't think you understand. Happy to discuss more to further this feature and increase clarity, what is it that you think I don't understand?
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@KieranDevvs If you have 3 files on a single torrent, you can currently prioritize one file as max, another as high, and another as normal. That makes those three files download in the order you want. OK, "Prioritize by File Order" is fine for that.

But what if you have 12 files on that torrent? You can use "Prioritize by File Order" to set the top 4 items as max, the middle 4 items as High, and the last 4 to Normal. There's no way to make the first file download first, the second to download third, the fourth to download fourth, the fifth to download fifth....the 12th file to download only after the 11th.

"Fine Grained Download Priorities" from uTorrent are the solution for that, by increasing the number of priorities from 3 (Max, High, Normal) to as many as the number of files. You can also individually assign a priority of "5" to a single file instead of being restricted to the three current priorities.

12 possible file priorities, is better than 3.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @KieranDevvs If you have 3 files on a single torrent, you can currently prioritize one file as max, another as high, and another as normal. That makes those three files download in the order you want. OK, "Prioritize by File Order" is fine for that. But what if you have 12 files on that torrent? You can use "Prioritize by File Order" to set the top 4 items as max, the middle 4 items as High, and the last 4 to Normal. There's no way to make the first file download first, the second to download third, the fourth to download fourth, the fifth to download fifth....the 12th file to download only after the 11th. "Fine Grained Download Priorities" from uTorrent are the solution for that, by increasing the number of priorities from 3 (Max, High, Normal) to as many as the number of files. You can also individually assign a priority of "5" to a single file instead of being restricted to the three current priorities. 12 possible file priorities, is better than 3.
Author
Owner

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@KieranDevvs If you have 3 files on a single torrent, you can currently prioritize one file as max, another as high, and another as normal. That makes those three files download in the order you want. OK, "Prioritize by File Order" is fine for that.

But what if you have 12 files on that torrent? You can use "Prioritize by File Order" to set the top 4 items as max, the middle 4 items as High, and the last 4 to Normal. There's no way to make the first file download first, the second to download third, the fourth to download fourth, the fifth to download fifth....the 12th file to download only after the 11th.

"Fine Grained Download Priorities" from uTorrent are the solution for that, by increasing the number of priorities from 3 (Max, High, Normal) to as many as the number of files.

I think we both agree unless I'm mistaken? I am advocating for 2 things to be present in qBittorrent:

  1. A way to priorities any number of files within a given torrent. As for how this should work in practice, I am completely familiar with assigning integers (whole numbers) to individual files or selecting multiple files and having the torrent client assign ordered integers based on the file order.

  2. Sequential file downloading. Currently to my knowledge, qBittorrent only has support for sequentially downloading the whole torrent and not individual files within a torrent. Its good to have the client download pieces using an optimised algorithm when you don't need sequential downloads (for benefits like keeping availability as high as possible), but if you do need sequential downloading, its a waste to force the entire torrent which may have a large amount of files, to download sequentially.

Here's a real world scenario. Lets say you have a torrent consisting of 8 episodes of some media. You want to watch the first episode as soon as the data becomes available, but you don't care about the rest. You prioritise all the files in a priority of 1 to 8 (matching with the relevant episode number, first episode first, last episode last). You then sequentially download episode 1, but leave episodes 2-8 on the default download mechanism to optimise the overall download.

Tixati actually has the ability to auto configure downloads based on file extensions which is really handy as you don't even need to manually do anything once its set up. Both priority and sequential configurations can be automatically applied to multi file torrents. I'm not suggesting that we include these levels of configuration into this feature, but it would be a stepping stone to getting there in the future.

Image
@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > [@KieranDevvs](https://github.com/KieranDevvs) If you have 3 files on a single torrent, you can currently prioritize one file as max, another as high, and another as normal. That makes those three files download in the order you want. OK, "Prioritize by File Order" is fine for that. > > But what if you have 12 files on that torrent? You can use "Prioritize by File Order" to set the top 4 items as max, the middle 4 items as High, and the last 4 to Normal. There's no way to make the first file download first, the second to download third, the fourth to download fourth, the fifth to download fifth....the 12th file to download only after the 11th. > > "Fine Grained Download Priorities" from uTorrent are the solution for that, by increasing the number of priorities from 3 (Max, High, Normal) to as many as the number of files. I think we both agree unless I'm mistaken? I am advocating for 2 things to be present in qBittorrent: 1) A way to priorities any number of files within a given torrent. As for how this should work in practice, I am completely familiar with assigning integers (whole numbers) to individual files or selecting multiple files and having the torrent client assign ordered integers based on the file order. 2) Sequential file downloading. Currently to my knowledge, qBittorrent only has support for sequentially downloading the whole torrent and not individual files within a torrent. Its good to have the client download pieces using an optimised algorithm when you don't need sequential downloads (for benefits like keeping availability as high as possible), but if you do need sequential downloading, its a waste to force the entire torrent which may have a large amount of files, to download sequentially. Here's a real world scenario. Lets say you have a torrent consisting of 8 episodes of some media. You want to watch the first episode as soon as the data becomes available, but you don't care about the rest. You prioritise all the files in a priority of 1 to 8 (matching with the relevant episode number, first episode first, last episode last). You then sequentially download episode 1, but leave episodes 2-8 on the default download mechanism to optimise the overall download. Tixati actually has the ability to auto configure downloads based on file extensions which is really handy as you don't even need to manually do anything once its set up. Both priority and sequential configurations can be automatically applied to multi file torrents. I'm not suggesting that we include these levels of configuration into this feature, but it would be a stepping stone to getting there in the future. <img width="521" height="654" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0708d156-16ad-4888-856a-543d7880aa4d" />
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion.

Pick $100 or $1000 mutually exclusive and think again.

Here's a real world scenario. Lets say you have a torrent consisting of 8 episodes of some media. You want to watch the first episode as soon as the data becomes available, but you don't care about the rest.

Yes, and existing sequential download mode covers that. Although files in a torrent are not guaranteed to be in alphabetic order, there are a lot of ways to mess with ordering.

Feature requests are a way to gauge community interest and document needs.

I think users should at least try to investigate technical difficulties associated with the feature they want. To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff.

Like libtorrent actually having only 7 priorities internally. It clamps for min-max values and some of them have special hardcoded meaning, so 7 is a brick wall you can't overcome on qBittorrent's side.
Despite 7 being more than current 3, I don't think it would improve the situation dramatically. So you really will want to rewrite libtorrent's code here, but good luck with that. Does that feature worth a major library rewrite with introduction of possible bugs and backward compatibility issues? I think not.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion. Pick $100 or $1000 mutually exclusive and think again. > Here's a real world scenario. Lets say you have a torrent consisting of 8 episodes of some media. You want to watch the first episode as soon as the data becomes available, but you don't care about the rest. Yes, and existing sequential download mode covers that. Although files in a torrent are not guaranteed to be in alphabetic order, there are a lot of ways to mess with ordering. > Feature requests are a way to gauge community interest and document needs. I think users should at least try to investigate technical difficulties associated with the feature they want. To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff. Like libtorrent actually having only [7 priorities](https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/blob/4479071bf5d202b957f526c692573e5692fdf3d5/include/libtorrent/download_priority.hpp#L42-L53) internally. It [clamps](https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/blob/4479071bf5d202b957f526c692573e5692fdf3d5/src/torrent.cpp#L5670) for min-max values and some of them have special hardcoded meaning, so 7 is a brick wall you can't overcome on qBittorrent's side. Despite 7 being more than current 3, I don't think it would improve the situation dramatically. So you really will want to rewrite libtorrent's code here, but good luck with that. Does that feature worth a major library rewrite with introduction of possible bugs and backward compatibility issues? I think not.
Author
Owner

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion.

Pick $100 or $1000 mutually exclusive and think again.

Sorry I mean the inverse, they aren't mutually exclusive. Mutually exclusive would mean they cant be used in combination and do the same thing, which they are not.

My explanation of the two features clearly shows they do different things and can be combined to have a range of functionality. One cannot be BETTER than the other because they DONT do the same thing.

Sequential downloading = Downloading file pieces in sequential order.
Priority = Downloading files in an user specific order.

"Downloading file pieces in sequential order" cannot be better than "Downloading files in an user specific order" because they aren't talking about the same thing one is talking about files, the other file pieces...

Its like saying car wheels are better than car doors... Do you see how that doesn't make sense and is an invalid opinon? Most people want both on their car for it to function as expected.

I think users should at least try to investigate technical difficulties associated with the feature they want. To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff.

Like libtorrent actually having only 7 priorities internally. It clamps for min-max values and some of them have special hardcoded meaning, so 7 is a brick wall you can't overcome on qBittorrent's side.
Despite 7 being more than current 3, I don't think it would improve the situation dramatically. So you really will want to rewrite libtorrent's code here, but good luck with that. Does that feature worth a major library rewrite with introduction of possible bugs and backward compatibility issues? I think not.

We know what you think, you've made your opinions very clear already. The problem is... No one here agrees with you.

To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff.

No one made you or anyone else DO anything, if you feel like your own time or someone else's time has been wasted, that is unfortunately your problem as you chose to participate. You're not the main character in a story, you're also not the only developer here. Please keep your ego to yourself and keep comments related to the feature request. If you have no intention of assisting, that is fine and we respect that, but please don't act like just because you aren't interested or you think that this is too hard to implement, that means no one else is willing to do so.

Thanks.

@KieranDevvs commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > > They aren't mutual, how can two things that are mutually exclusive be better than one or the another, its just not a valid opinion. > > Pick $100 or $1000 mutually exclusive and think again. Sorry I mean the inverse, they aren't mutually exclusive. Mutually exclusive would mean they cant be used in combination and do the same thing, which they are not. My explanation of the two features clearly shows they do different things and can be combined to have a range of functionality. One cannot be BETTER than the other because they DONT do the same thing. Sequential downloading = Downloading **file pieces** in sequential order. Priority = Downloading **files** in an user specific order. "Downloading **file pieces** in sequential order" **cannot** be better than "Downloading **files** in an user specific order" because they aren't talking about the same thing one is talking about files, the other file pieces... Its like saying car wheels are better than car doors... Do you see how that doesn't make sense and is an invalid opinon? Most people want both on their car for it to function as expected. >I think users should at least try to investigate technical difficulties associated with the feature they want. To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff. >Like libtorrent actually having only [7 priorities](https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/blob/4479071bf5d202b957f526c692573e5692fdf3d5/include/libtorrent/download_priority.hpp#L42-L53) internally. It [clamps](https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/blob/4479071bf5d202b957f526c692573e5692fdf3d5/src/torrent.cpp#L5670) for min-max values and some of them have special hardcoded meaning, so 7 is a brick wall you can't overcome on qBittorrent's side. Despite 7 being more than current 3, I don't think it would improve the situation dramatically. So you really will want to rewrite libtorrent's code here, but good luck with that. Does that feature worth a major library rewrite with introduction of possible bugs and backward compatibility issues? I think not. We know what you think, you've made your opinions very clear already. The problem is... No one here agrees with you. >To not spend devs time on irrelevant stuff. No one made you or anyone else *DO* anything, if you feel like your own time or someone else's time has been wasted, that is unfortunately your problem as you chose to participate. You're not the main character in a story, you're also not the only developer here. Please keep your ego to yourself and keep comments related to the feature request. If you have no intention of assisting, that is fine and we respect that, but please don't act like just because you aren't interested or you think that this is too hard to implement, that means no one else is willing to do so. Thanks.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

Sequential downloading = Downloading file pieces in sequential order.
Priority = Downloading files in an user specific order.

Ok wait, you are not talking about downloading files in sequential order automatically? You want just more priority levels to assign them manually?

I thought we are talking about the bt.sequential_files feature from uT.

Image

bt.sequential_download here is analogous to what qBittorrent does and bt.sequential_files is another option which assigns priorities automatically for files in alphabetic order. I thought you ask for the latter to be implemented in qBittorrent.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > Sequential downloading = Downloading **file pieces** in sequential order. > Priority = Downloading **files** in an user specific order. Ok wait, you are not talking about downloading files in sequential order automatically? You want just more priority levels to assign them manually? I thought we are talking about the `bt.sequential_files` feature from uT. ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/b3b4da69-c24f-4ee0-9ac8-d89f8b6af3e7) `bt.sequential_download` here is analogous to what qBittorrent does and `bt.sequential_files` is another option which assigns priorities automatically for files in alphabetic order. I thought you ask for the latter to be implemented in qBittorrent.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@KieranDevvs @HanabishiRecca This is definitely the disconnect. We were all talking past one another!

"Use Fine Grained File Priorities" gives you a large number of priorities, and is an option that's off by default, though I don't know why. It's also used by "Order by File Order," since manually setting 20 different files' priorities would be slow. This function is in other torrent clients and would be very cool to have in qBitTorrent!

The bt.sequential_files is not what I'm referring to, to be clear, nor is bt.sequential_download since simply alphabetical does not offer the appropriate level of control.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @KieranDevvs @HanabishiRecca This is definitely the disconnect. We were all talking past one another! "Use Fine Grained File Priorities" gives you a large number of priorities, and is an option that's off by default, though I don't know why. It's also used by "Order by File Order," since manually setting 20 different files' priorities would be slow. This function is in other torrent clients and would be very cool to have in qBitTorrent! The bt.sequential_files is not what I'm referring to, to be clear, nor is bt.sequential_download since simply alphabetical does not offer the appropriate level of control.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

The bt.sequential_files is not what I'm referring to, to be clear, nor is bt.sequential_download since simply alphabetical does not offer the appropriate level of control.

Actually looks like I remember it wrong. Apparently uTorrent's bt.sequential_download + bt.sequential_files only do what qBittorrent already does with its sequential mode?

It's also used by "Order by File Order,"

Yeah, looks like that's the option I was actually thinking of.

Image

Although somehow I remebered it being more automatic.

"Use Fine Grained File Priorities" gives you a large number of priorities

This one?

Image

Totally forgot about it tbh, haven't used uTorrent (and Windows at all) for a very long time.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): > The bt.sequential_files is not what I'm referring to, to be clear, nor is bt.sequential_download since simply alphabetical does not offer the appropriate level of control. Actually looks like I remember it wrong. Apparently uTorrent's `bt.sequential_download` + `bt.sequential_files` only do what qBittorrent already does with its sequential mode? > It's also used by "Order by File Order," Yeah, looks like that's the option I was actually thinking of. ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/0100bda9-0880-4b02-b045-d1352be2a790) Although somehow I remebered it being more automatic. > "Use Fine Grained File Priorities" gives you a large number of priorities This one? ![Image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/c8378144-e505-4139-9723-13787a087dc2) Totally forgot about it tbh, haven't used uTorrent (and Windows at all) for a very long time.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

Use Fine Grained File Priorities. It's a UI thing, if you right click on a file, you select from many priorities instead of just the three.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): Use Fine Grained File Priorities. It's a UI thing, if you right click on a file, you select from many priorities instead of just the three.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

Well, libtorrent has 7 priority levels internally (not counting dont_download). Should be relatively easy to expose them.
I.e. fill the gap

github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent@aec2fcd58b/src/base/bittorrent/downloadpriority.h (L33-L38)

But more than that is not technically possible at the moment.

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): Well, libtorrent has 7 priority levels internally (not counting `dont_download`). Should be relatively easy to expose them. I.e. fill the gap https://github.com/qbittorrent/qBittorrent/blob/aec2fcd58b8c6a00881d462c27d4222585f00f19/src/base/bittorrent/downloadpriority.h#L33-L38 But more than that is not technically possible at the moment.
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@HanabishiRecca Thanks. I've added a LibTorrent feature request here: https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/8120

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @HanabishiRecca Thanks. I've added a LibTorrent feature request here: https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/issues/8120
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

I'm making a PoC code under existing conditions.

Image
@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): I'm making a PoC code under existing conditions. <img width="250" height="510" alt="Image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/3c05e4ca-112c-4067-812b-5810d7352341" />
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@HanabishiRecca Thanks so much, that looks perfect!

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @HanabishiRecca Thanks so much, that looks perfect!
Author
Owner

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026):

@HanabishiRecca Don't forget to update the "Priority by Shown File Order" to assign 0-7. Thanks.

@cbordeman commented on GitHub (Jan 15, 2026): @HanabishiRecca Don't forget to update the "Priority by Shown File Order" to assign 0-7. Thanks.
Author
Owner

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2026):

@HanabishiRecca commented on GitHub (Jan 17, 2026): * #23751
Author
Owner

@dbny89 commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2026):

Absolutely need fine-grained priorities. Not only do they force the download order you want, but they allow you to rank files within torrents of hundreds of files, which is just impossible right now. I say this having just migrated from uTorrent yesterday -- with 3,900 torrents, it was crashing hourly. But this feature is one of the ones that kept me from migrating for years. "Normal" priority was always 8, so if I liked something a little, it'd get a 9, and if I loved something, it'd get a 15. But if I disliked something, I could rank it a 7 or maybe if I intensely disliked it a 1 (obviously to do your part and seed a torrent fully you can't just skip the file). Ranking below neutral is completely impossible in qbittorent. We need uTorrent-style priorities. (The other post-migration thorn is having 99.9% torrents because utorrent apparently didn't write out 100% of the data in a hundred torrents or so -- "part" files still in the folders. Maybe due to a bunch of read-only files and folders. And bt2qbt is the program used to migrate. Did a good job.)

@dbny89 commented on GitHub (Feb 4, 2026): Absolutely need fine-grained priorities. Not only do they force the download order you want, but they allow you to rank files within torrents of hundreds of files, which is just impossible right now. I say this having just migrated from uTorrent yesterday -- with 3,900 torrents, it was crashing hourly. But this feature is one of the ones that kept me from migrating for years. "Normal" priority was always 8, so if I liked something a little, it'd get a 9, and if I loved something, it'd get a 15. But if I disliked something, I could rank it a 7 or maybe if I intensely disliked it a 1 (obviously to do your part and seed a torrent fully you can't just skip the file). Ranking below neutral is **completely** impossible in qbittorent. We need uTorrent-style priorities. (The other post-migration thorn is having 99.9% torrents because utorrent apparently didn't write out 100% of the data in a hundred torrents or so -- "part" files still in the folders. Maybe due to a bunch of read-only files and folders. And bt2qbt is the program used to migrate. Did a good job.)
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
starred/qBittorrent#16108
No description provided.