Buffalo NAS-Central Forums

Welcome to the Linkstation Wiki community
It is currently Mon Aug 20, 2018 9:24 am

All times are UTC+01:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2007 4:26 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:43 pm
Posts: 13
Location: Wellesley, MA, United States
I'm running FreeLink on my LS-Pro, and have installed "Enhanced CTorrent" from http://www.rahul.net/dholmes/ctorrent/, specifically the dnh3 release, with update patch applied, and compiled with the native toolchain.

At http://buffalo.nas-central.org/index.php?title=Enhanced_CTorrent_and_CTCS it's claimed that
Quote:
Enhanced CTorrent has an average CPU load of 4.2% at a download rate of 100KB/s and an upload rate of 100KB/s on an ARM equiped Linkstation Pro.


But I'm seeing significantly higher CPU usage, at download and upload rates in the 5KB/s (or less) range:
Code:
  PID USER      PR  NI  VIRT  RES  SHR S %CPU %MEM    TIME+  COMMAND                                      
22647 root      26  10 11252 8836 1024 S 25.7  7.0  88:42.82 ctorrent                                     
22662 root      25  10 18308 9156 1028 S 16.0  7.3  98:41.83 ctorrent                                     
22661 root      25  10 21804  18m 1028 S 11.7 15.4 111:09.32 ctorrent                                     


Is my experience typical, or did I somehow get the build (or something else) wrong?

Thanks in advance,
/JEP


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2007 8:48 am 
Offline
Newbie
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 10
Location: Austria
you seem to be running ctorrent as opposed to enhanced-ctorrent ;)


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2007 3:31 pm 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 9:20 pm
Posts: 366
Location: Chicago USA
thats not the case, if he got it from the right place, the process is called ctorrent, but its just "enhanced" or modified from the original (out of date) ctorrent code.

_________________
1 LS-GL: (FreeLink - 2.6.22 kernel)- backup and media server...
As of June 11, 2010:
admin@LS320:~$ uptime
20:23:40 up 417 days, 20:09, 1 user, load average: 0.20, 0.21, 0.30

That's only because I had to move that time ago. Love this box and this community, wish I had more time to dedicate to it.


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu May 24, 2007 7:42 pm 
Offline
Newbie
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 22, 2007 12:28 pm
Posts: 10
Location: Austria
*shrug*
Well, I run the optware pacakge of enhanced-ctorrent on my NSLU2 (arm5 based).
I just did a test, and while a torrent was seeding at roughly 80k, and downloading at ~120k per sec, thats what top said:

Code:
4792 guest     18   0  2328 2328 1364 R  7.5  7.6   0:01.33 enhanced-ctorrent


The slug is considerably slower than a linkstation, but then it doesnt have to deal with raid at all. *shrug*


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2007 12:15 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 23, 2006 9:20 pm
Posts: 366
Location: Chicago USA
fizze wrote:
*shrug*
Well, I run the optware pacakge of enhanced-ctorrent on my NSLU2 (arm5 based).
I just did a test, and while a torrent was seeding at roughly 80k, and downloading at ~120k per sec, thats what top said:

Code:
4792 guest     18   0  2328 2328 1364 R  7.5  7.6   0:01.33 enhanced-ctorrent


The slug is considerably slower than a linkstation, but then it doesnt have to deal with raid at all. *shrug*


I will agree with you, I was basing my understanding on the wiki article pointing to downloading the util here, which seems to be ambiguous on the enhanced part.

Sorry for my confusion.

_________________
1 LS-GL: (FreeLink - 2.6.22 kernel)- backup and media server...
As of June 11, 2010:
admin@LS320:~$ uptime
20:23:40 up 417 days, 20:09, 1 user, load average: 0.20, 0.21, 0.30

That's only because I had to move that time ago. Love this box and this community, wish I had more time to dedicate to it.


Top
   
PostPosted: Fri May 25, 2007 7:04 pm 
Offline
Regular Member

Joined: Tue Dec 19, 2006 10:12 am
Posts: 129
Location: u.k
This is my top list @ 15k
At night I don`t have a problem using all of my 350k bytes bandwidth.
So run out of bandwidth, well before I run out of cpu.

Mem: 120664K used, 5540K free, 0K shrd, 28K buff, 62360K cached
Load average: 0.72, 1.05, 0.74 (State: S=sleeping R=running, W=waiting)

PID USER STATUS RSS PPID %CPU %MEM COMMAND
10301 root S 6272 1 0.7 4.9 ctorrent
12354 root R 836 12350 0.5 0.6 top
20220 root S 3924 1 0.0 3.1 ctcs


Top
   
PostPosted: Sat May 26, 2007 12:37 am 
Offline
Newbie

Joined: Mon May 21, 2007 5:43 pm
Posts: 13
Location: Wellesley, MA, United States
OK, so it looks like my copy is taking up an usually large amount of CPU. (And, yes, it is "Enhanced CTorrent," but the executable produced by the Makefile is named just "ctorrent".)

When I say I'm using "the native tool chain," I mean I did nothing more than
Code:
apt-get install g++
./configure
make
make install


gcc --version reports
Code:
gcc (GCC) 4.1.2 20061115 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-21)
.

The config.log file says target = arm-linux-gnu -- is that what it should be? (I've seen mention of arm-none-linux-gnueabi here and there, but haven't been able to make much sense of the toolchain discussions.)

I know there's some floating point in this program, but I can't really imagine there's enough to have much effect. How could I tell whether my executable is being compiled for hard float or soft float?

Thanks
/JEP


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC+01:00


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited