[Declined] [No user feedback] JD2 downloads slower than everywhere else

[widardd]

JDL2 seems to be limited to 2mbyte/s per thread and 20 threads is this applications maximum.
How do I get JDL2 to perform as good as curl?

Target location is an SSD, it really cannot be IO related.

Thanks!

[pspzockerscene]

Hi,
there is no limitation built into JD.

-psp-

[pspzockerscene]

1. You're not writing this on your disk in your curl test.
2. We do not have a limit in JD.
3. Your issue might be some kind of bad configuration.
Please contact us via support@jdownloader.org and we'll look into this deeper.

-psp-

[widardd]

Originally Posted by pspzockerscene

1. You're not writing this on your disk in your curl test.
2. We do not have a limit in JD.
3. Your issue might be some kind of bad configuration.
Please contact us via support@jdownloader.org and we'll look into this deeper.

-psp-

Sent a mail and included a curl test writing to disk, I wasn't lying when I said it cannot be IO related.

[raztoki]

just because its an ssd doesn't automatically mean it can handle high demanding tasks. it could be many things, just a few to consider ruling out...

high download speeds in curl for instance would been done with a single chunk? , yet in your JD test it was done with 20. so I would test in JD with a single chunk and compare.

It could also mean your storage device might not handle handle lots of smaller writes, JD default buffer is 500kb, not sure curls? quick google, 16kB curl.haxx.se/libcurl/c/CURLOPT_BUFFERSIZE.html
maybe adjust the buffer and see if you can tweak it (GeneralSettings.maxbuffersize)
for instance if Im right about the chunking jd would have filled 500kb * 20 chunks then flush them when fill. Also requires larger amount of memory too.

[pspzockerscene]

Hi,

please reply to the mail you got from us.

-psp-