After trying 3 rented servers, I decided that two were performing too poorly for their cost, and switched both H@H clients to new rented servers
identical to the one with the 3rd client. With the first switch, I just copied everything to the new server. Despite the cache itself fitting with a couple GB of room to spare, the client apparently had too many static ranges assigned given the requirement of 175 MB per. I didn't want to manually delete any cache files that might have been part of the static ranges, so I reset my static ranges to 0 and deleted a few folders until H@H told me it had enough space to run, and then I ran it with --force_dirty and --verify_cache so the client would know which files were still in the database. Predictably, the connection rate dropped dramatically, but so did quality.
I didn't want to waste all the bandwidth that had been used to send files to my clients, which is why I tried copying the cache at first, but the huge quality drop didn't seem to be worth it. I know it's not very fun to be in the middle of... something, when an image suddenly refuses to load. So for the second client, instead of transferring the cache, I simply downloaded H@H again, reset the static ranges, and let it build a new cache.
Even though both clients have been running on the better servers for a week or so, their quality is still horrible - the good client that was not moved has quality averaging around 8500, but both transferred clients have average quality around 4000, despite all three running on the better virtual host (which is known around here for being a good choice for H@H). I didn't think I did anything wrong since the static ranges were reset and the caches were verified before running H@H again, but maybe I did, since everything else (server type, configuration, location) is exactly the same as the 3rd client.
Does anyone have any ideas what I might do to fix the quality problem? Perhaps the virtual server host is actually horrible and the "good" client just got lucky with its physical hardware? Low quality kills hath generation as well as preventing me from getting more servers (average of 7000 required), which I very much want. I looked on the wiki and checked past threads on quality but didn't see anything about how to increase it. Servers are Ubuntu 12.04 with nothing at all on them except H@H, so it's not like there's something like Peerblock blocking connections.
On a different subject: When using "java -jar HentaiAtHome.jar --disable_logging --use_more_memory" I get
CODE
Unknown setting use_more_memory = true
Was the setting removed entirely or just renamed or something? The wiki still lists it as a usable parameter, so if we know what's going on I can edit and fix it.
Hentai@Home 1.2.5, Call now at 1-800-MORE-SPEED for a free sample!
Feb 7 2015, 13:34
