A Segmented Downloads workaround...

Come here to discuss FileZilla and FTP in general

Moderator: Project members

Message
Author
eriksp
500 Command not understood
Posts: 2
Joined: 2016-01-12 13:47
First name: Erik

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#16 Post by eriksp » 2016-01-12 15:21

botg wrote:You are dealing with a political issue. Technological workarounds are no solution to political issues.
I understand that you really don't want to support segmented transfers. Your reasons appear to primarily be that you think the use cases for segmented downloads are wrong, that whatever causes this need should be fixed somewhere else. You're likely correct, and it is your prerogative to deny this feature.

It does however not change the fact that segmented downloads are the most practical solution to several real world scenarios, that is is wanted and requested by your users, and that it is provided by your competitors.

For my particular case: No, segmented downloads will not make any difference to the suppression of information and speech in this country. It was never intended to, I didn't frame such an argument, and I don't see why you make that connection. I'm looking for a practical solution to a real world problem, where a clearly defined and absolute technical limitation is imposed on me. Imposed technical limitations will always exist, and arguing against the need for working within such limitations leads nowhere.

Don't misunderstand me: I'm very grateful for the work you've put into FileZilla, and I don't intend to be bitchy or demanding. Your arguments against this feature just doesn't make sense to me, as they seem a lot more political/ideological than technical/pragmatic. I'll stop arguing your refusal, and simply stick with lftp until I am stationed in a more reasonable country.

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 33048
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse
Contact:

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#17 Post by botg » 2016-01-12 15:23

It does however not change the fact that segmented downloads are the most practical workaround to several real world scenarios, that is is wanted and requested by your users, and that it is provided by your competitors.

Your arguments against this feature just doesn't make sense to me, as they seem a lot more political/ideological than technical/pragmatic
Segmented downloads have the technical drawbacks I described, they are also very difficult to implement. Thus, the pragmatic solution is to remove intentional throttling, fix bad server configuration and to lay down bigger cables, each of which is comparatively simple.

Nytron
500 Command not understood
Posts: 3
Joined: 2016-01-05 10:52

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#18 Post by Nytron » 2016-02-12 02:02

botg wrote:
Segmented downloads have the technical drawbacks I described, they are also very difficult to implement. Thus, the pragmatic solution is to remove intentional throttling, fix bad server configuration and to lay down bigger cables, each of which is comparatively simple.
The end user, a.k.a. anyone who uses FileZilla, has no control over any of your purposed "solutions". In any given spot in the world, there are usually only one or two ISP options unless you're near a big city. The end user cannot remove intentional throttling or lay down bigger cables. They have no choice on how their packets are routed or anything with the peering, it's random. So you're essentially saying segmented downloading is too difficult to implement and that people should just move their place of residence? FileZilla needs a fork, badly. What a terrible opinionated stance.

Igor Pavlov invented 7z archive format and developed 7zip client single-handedly. But we can't add a top requested, undeniably useful feature to the most actively updated and used FTP client in the world because it's difficult to implement? Meanwhile, other clients have managed to easily add the feature.

LFTP by default becomes the best solution for now for segmented downloads. I should have used this client all along. It's 2016 and the best solution is a CLI FTP client? If you told me that in the 90s, I would have laughed at you. Please reconsider, even though you personally don't need the feature and you moved in order to get a different ISP, please know FileZilla is incomplete without this feature.

User avatar
Elevory
500 Command not understood
Posts: 4
Joined: 2011-09-05 18:13
First name: Robin
Last name: Epple

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#19 Post by Elevory » 2016-10-28 07:02

I agree that multi-segmented downloading is a needed feature.

I'm a Comcast customer suffering from traffic shaping to a server I frequently use. There are no other high-speed ISPs in my area, as is generally the case in the United States. I simply have to use a different FTP client to achieve acceptable transfer speeds. That's all there is to it.

tedych
426 Connection timed out
Posts: 52
Joined: 2013-11-24 10:16
First name: Teo
Last name: Meo

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#20 Post by tedych » 2017-12-21 10:55

Dev should just acknowledge he doesn't have the time or will to implement a feature instead of constantly trying to convince all we have problems with our servers/setup.
Just to add to the examples.
I have fast HDDs on a home server (or whatever), my gigabit network is the bottleneck (halving the bandwidth I can get from my 3TB drive). I cannot afford the VERY expensive 10GbE network approach, so I choose to use NIC teaming to obtain 220MB/s bandwitdh. This is not true link aggregation as in a RAID0, so if I transfer one big file, it uses only one of the links. To use both links the transfer should be segmented to at least two connections so Windows would split it between the two available 1Gbps links.
Does this make any sense to you?! I believe not and I will be directed to fix my network with $1k hardware (while I only need those 220MB/s speeds). Thanks.

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 33048
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse
Contact:

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#21 Post by botg » 2017-12-21 21:27

@tedych: This sounds like a perfect fit for a generic link aggregation solution. Get the full 220MB/s for _EVERY_ program using TCP/IP, even if it's a single TCP connection.

Fairly simple to do in software. The hardest part would be to figure out how to create the virtual network interface for this.

topbanana
450 Internal Error
Posts: 36
Joined: 2012-11-09 02:29

Re: A Segmented Downloads workaround...

#22 Post by topbanana » 2020-07-20 18:53

botg wrote:
2016-01-12 14:30
You are dealing with a political issue. Technological workarounds are no solution to political issues.
What the hell are you on about???

You're refusing to implement a much requested option, that is present in other FTP clients... That, yes, has it's issues, but is not an issue in situations where the user owns both server/client, which is exceedingly common. And you've just completely ignored everyone real-world situations, that they are stuck with, just because you seem to have a direct connection with LINX, and you've only ever had sub microsecond pings to your remote FTP servers. Some of us are trying to transfer files to and from the other side of the world. Most of us do not have any control of what ISP we connect with, let alone the routing... And your secret sauce for configuring your FTP servers such that it works with high latencies, multi-hop connections is........ Secret.

SO.

My workaround is entirely valid here. It works. It does what we want, need.
It's one way to enable transferring of massive single files such that the connection speeds can be massively faster, sometimes enabling saturating the connection, just buy remotely splitting the file and using your beautiful, efficient multiple simultaneous/concurrent transfer option.

It's a workable, usable solution to the lack of empathy you have displayed here.

Post Reply