Which OS do you like for torrents?

[GregB]

Depending on the application, I use primarily 2 different OS'.

For rtorrent and rutorrent, Centos.

For utorrent, I use ubuntu with wine.

I know a lot of people have issues with Centos, due to memory spikes and such.

If you are going to setup a shared rtorrent install, Centos works very nicely.

This of course depends on your knowledge of the operating system.
To get Centos to work nicely with multiple or single instances of rtorrent and/or other services, you need to really optimize the kernel.

Memory optimizations done through sysctl can really benefit you there.

For shared servers, you really need to have a strong connection.

rtorrent sort of fails when it comes to multiple users, but if you research, you can make Centos run with such a low load, it will boggle your mind.

For example, I have a server up housing 6 users. Each has about 10 different torrents running right now, on a 100mb/s connection.

The load is: 2.01

during hash checks, the loads spike to 6

Now, on a poorly configured Centos box, 6 can be horrible, shutting down all other services, or making them virtually useless.

But on my boxes, they can(and have) handled a load of 100+ without disruption to many services(of course ssh runs with higher priority than anything else, to prevent the problem of me not being able to get in), but still.

I'd like to know your opinion as well.

Thanks.

[pinn]

For home - Windows.
For seedbox - some Linux distant.

[anon]

Home: Windows XP
Seedbox: don't have one.

[Cabalo]

Depending on the application, I use primarily 2 different OS'.

For rtorrent and rutorrent, Centos.

For utorrent, I use ubuntu with wine.

I know a lot of people have issues with Centos, due to memory spikes and such.

If you are going to setup a shared rtorrent install, Centos works very nicely.

This of course depends on your knowledge of the operating system.
To get Centos to work nicely with multiple or single instances of rtorrent and/or other services, you need to really optimize the kernel.

Memory optimizations done through sysctl can really benefit you there.

For shared servers, you really need to have a strong connection.

rtorrent sort of fails when it comes to multiple users, but if you research, you can make Centos run with such a low load, it will boggle your mind.

For example, I have a server up housing 6 users. Each has about 10 different torrents running right now, on a 100mb/s connection.

The load is: 2.01

during hash checks, the loads spike to 6

Now, on a poorly configured Centos box, 6 can be horrible, shutting down all other services, or making them virtually useless.

But on my boxes, they can(and have) handled a load of 100+ without disruption to many services(of course ssh runs with higher priority than anything else, to prevent the problem of me not being able to get in), but still.

I'd like to know your opinion as well.

Thanks.

Which optimizations do you make at kernel level?
Usually I go for debian when I use servers, though I've tried CentOS, but haven't gone much in depth.

[MarioXXL]

Only Win XP Prof. for me!

[j6796713]

depands, sometimes windows xp other times lunux, fedora distro. they both work fine for me but in the end it all depands on the needs and whats available.

[waeldiab]

home - Windows.7
seedbox - ubuntu

[Vinceftw]

I like linux even for torrents :P
never had a server, home speed is very fast! 384 kbps ftw o/

[Darude9000]

home - Windows XP
seedbox - linux

[dagg3r]

home connection: win 7 FTW :P

[ca_aok]

Assuming you're referring to seedboxes only, Debian. My load average is around 0.26, and that's with all sorts of things running at once (rtorrent/rutorrent, apache, ZNC, eggdrop, mysql, xvfb, etc). Having a load average of 2 running rtorrent alone implies CentOS is a terrible choice. And that's with 200 torrents, not 60.

Other advantages: easy package management, abundance of guides, very stable operating system (unless you're running SID), and low resource use.

[Tv Controls you]

Home- windows xp (for torrent machine) utorrent
windows 7 for downloading fast (my gaming rig) utorrent

Seedbox-
wine with utorrent on a ubuntu server
(I would use windows xp if I could because it uses less ram than ubuntu)

I actually hate linux, but I wouldn't consider myself a windows fanboy.... Even though I love windows os... lol

[Tokeman]

Home: Windows 7
Seedbox: Never used one

[PROTOCOL]

Windows 7 Ultimate ;)

[Magnum]

Windows XP!

[thisguy]

i run xp corporate mainly because of the copy and move to features that are upon the right click, all the options you need are right there

[GregB]

Hey guys,

The feedback is great. Thank you.


Assuming you're referring to seedboxes only, Debian. My load average is around 0.26, and that's with all sorts of things running at once (rtorrent/rutorrent, apache, ZNC, eggdrop, mysql, xvfb, etc). Having a load average of 2 running rtorrent alone implies CentOS is a terrible choice. And that's with 200 torrents, not 60.

Other advantages: easy package management, abundance of guides, very stable operating system (unless you're running SID), and low resource use.

I'd have to disagree about debian being "stable". Debian has it's ups and downs, and if I would risk the downtime, debian has quite a few nice features.

As for the load, my servers run apache, rtorrent, standard services, plus a few additional daemons written specifically for different purposes(perl, very low overhead).

rtorrent is being run multiple times, for any number of users.

In reality, I have more processes running under my seedbox servers, then I do under my streaming servers, lol.

As for the question about the kernel mods, I use sysctl and apply different memory options and such, I spent about 2 months tweaking it out right, and trying to find the balance.

Overall, the systems run quite smoothly. I see many like Windows XP, and I agree for a home operating system, windows XP is nice.

I recommend you guys check out windows 7. I too feared it was the "improved" version of vista(which for microsoft would have been a nearly impossible system to use), but really, it turned out to be one of the best operating systems I have ever tried.

I know this will sound like blasphemy, but I think I like it better then XP.

it can't run on a low end computer as well as XP can, but on the high end computers(dual or quad + mem), it performs extremely well.

[JakeSully]

Windows Vista ultimate licensed in my laptop

[laurie]

I know which OS I absolutely hate. hint: it ends with X.

[Zoltar600]

Windows 7 Ultimate. Not used linux for couple of months now. Last distro i tried was Mint 7 i think.

[Rigel9]

OS X with rtorrent/transmittion

[pinuk]

Windows Vista which came on my laptop. Plan to move to 7 when I get around to it (which knowing me will be a while).