axel and aria2c

  • Sebastien WILLEMIJNS

    Downloaded 647,1 megabytes in 1:11 seconds. (9281,85 KB/s)

    [#1 SIZE:610.5MiB/647.0MiB(94%) CN:5 SPD:8420.79KiB/s ETA:04s]
    FILE: ./image.iso

    hmmmm.... try 3 times axel and 3 times aria2c
    speed is better with axel.... hmmm.... why ?

    • tujikawa

      tujikawa - 2009-04-02

      I did the same thing.

      From my country, the transfer ratio is around 3000KiB/s in both axel and aria2 and the result is:

      • axel

      Downloaded 647.1 megabytes in 3:37 seconds. (3044.51 KB/s)

      real 3m38.755s
      user 0m1.012s
      sys 0m4.968s

      • aria2

      Download Results:
      gid|stat|avg speed |path/URI
      1| OK| 3.0MiB/s|/mnt/image.iso

      Status Legend:
      (OK):download completed.

      real 3m29.909s
      user 0m4.248s
      sys 0m3.176s

      That's comparable. I observed transfer rate is getting higher in aria2 sometimes.

      Did you compare the actual time of downloading?
      The printed speed may be deceiving sometimes..

      • Sebastien WILLEMIJNS

        what is the bash command to
        have this ?
        real 3m38.755s
        user 0m1.012s
        sys 0m4.968s

    • tujikawa

      tujikawa - 2009-04-02

      It doesn't affect download performance, but it will after that. Copying/playing those fragmented files takes a lot of time than preallocated files.
      That said, I admit that the fragmentation in HTTP/FTP is less obvious than BItTorrent because it can use bigger piece size than that of BitTorrent.
      Turning on preallocation is a safety-measure. If you don't need it, you can disable it by writing file-allocation=false in your aria2.conf file. Also if you use ext4(with extents), then you can use --file-allocation=falloc(added in 1.3.0), which can instantly allocations big files.

      • Ant Bryan

        Ant Bryan - 2009-04-02

        > Also if you use ext4(with extents), then you can use --file-allocation=falloc(added in 1.3.0), which can instantly allocations big files.

        I can't wait to try this out! newer distributions coming out have the option to use ext4.

      • Sebastien WILLEMIJNS

        idea is do not purpose filealloc by default if BT is not used no ?

    • tujikawa

      tujikawa - 2009-04-02

      That's good idea for linux :)
      But for FAT file systems(win32), because it doesn't support sparse files, there are will be long pause when segmented downloading is done without file allocation. I think file allocation is necessary for FAT file system.

    • tujikawa

      tujikawa - 2009-04-02



      time aria2c

      • Sebastien WILLEMIJNS

        • (i only spoken of aria2 in this comment) filealloc does nothing compared without filalloc...
          maybe it can help for BT transferts
          and/or slowdown computers ???

        • 1mn06 for axel, 1mn11 aria2c without prealloc...

        it will be interesting to know why axel is better...

    • tujikawa

      tujikawa - 2009-04-02

      fileallocation avoids fragmentation. I think it is not slow down download a lot.

      The difference is only 5 seconds. It can be ignored. If server has descent bandwidth, then both client performs well.
      I think aria2 is more complex than axel, there might be overhead before/after download.

      • Sebastien WILLEMIJNS

        25 seconds to create 650 Mo empty file without any advantage :-(


Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.

Sign up for the SourceForge newsletter:

No, thanks