Generalize sequential downloading #5942

New issue

Open

opened 2026-02-21 18:08:22 -05:00 by deekerman · 3 comments

deekerman commented

2026-02-21 18:08:22 -05:00

Owner

Originally created by @johncf on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017).

If the set of remaining pieces can be given a probability distribution skewed towards the beginning, then it might be a better alternative to the existing "Download in sequential order" feature. Additionally, the user may be given choices to select from different "strengths" of skewing too.

(I kinda feel bad when downloading in "hard sequential" order, but I really like to take a peek at parts of videos without waiting for more than 80% to be downloaded.)

Originally created by @johncf on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017). If the set of remaining pieces can be given a probability distribution skewed towards the beginning, then it might be a better alternative to the existing "Download in sequential order" feature. Additionally, the user may be given choices to select from different "strengths" of skewing too. (I kinda feel bad when downloading in "hard sequential" order, but I really like to take a peek at parts of videos without waiting for more than 80% to be downloaded.)

deekerman added the

Feature request

label

2026-02-21 18:08:22 -05:00

deekerman commented

2026-02-21 18:08:24 -05:00

Author

Owner

@thalieht commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017):

See PR #5314 and issue #182

@thalieht commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017): See PR #5314 and issue #182

deekerman commented

2026-02-21 18:08:26 -05:00

Author

Owner

@johncf commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017):

I saw the issue, but didn't see there was already a PR for it... It is also a nice alternative, but it would (or should) be having the exact same behavior as "hard sequential" if the deadlines are too short compared to the download speed. Personally, I am not interested in "streaming" a torrent in real-time. Let it take its time downloading the pieces, but at any point during the download, I simply like to have a higher proportion of data to be in a "usable" form (proximity) than the current uniformly random approach.

@johncf commented on GitHub (Aug 18, 2017): I saw the issue, but didn't see there was already a PR for it... It is also a nice alternative, but it would (or should) be having the exact same behavior as "hard sequential" if the deadlines are too short compared to the download speed. Personally, I am not interested in "streaming" a torrent in real-time. Let it take its time downloading the pieces, but at any point during the download, I simply like to have a higher proportion of data to be in a "usable" form (proximity) than the current uniformly random approach.

deekerman commented

2026-02-21 18:08:26 -05:00

Author

Owner

@xavier2k6 commented on GitHub (May 23, 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:

Please select/click the 👍 &/or ❤ reactions in the original/opening post of this ticket.
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 23, 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.)**