qBittorrent official forums

I scanned qBittorrent-3.2.3-release-3.2.3-0-g8bf23e8-Qt5-x64-setup.exe with VirusTotal.com and it gave the result 0/55 anti-virus engines reporting it as problematic.
Maybe your false positive was fixed in a definitions update Tomaso?

[quote="b9AcE"]
I scanned qBittorrent-3.2.3-release-3.2.3-0-g8bf23e8-Qt5-x64-setup.exe with VirusTotal.com and it gave the result 0/55 anti-virus engines reporting it as problematic.
Maybe your false positive was fixed in a definitions update Tomaso?
[/quote]

Nope.
I just checked, and I've got the very latest definitions.

--

EDIT:
It doesn't happen with the old installers, nor the new .7z archives.
..so something must have changed with the installers themselves.

'Susp' sounds like the heuristics have flagged it as a potential problem, rather than a full on detection. Kaspersky 2015 (one of the best apps which intensely monitors system processes ect) didn't make a peep for me. Installed and working A-OK, thanks again for the fast builds!

[quote="Rainmaker"]sounds like the heuristics have flagged it as a potential problem, rather than a full on detection.[/quote]

Yeah, well, I've submitted both installers to them as false positives, so we'll see what happens.

Damn!
I've reported the false positive to avast! two times already, but it seems that the reports didn't get through because of the file attachments!
Anyway, I just reported it again (with just links this time).

[quote="Tomaso"]Both installers (Qt4 and Qt5) gets flagged by avast! as "Win32:Evo-gen [Susp]".
A false positive of course, but a problem nevertheless.[/quote]

Well, that was fast..
As soon as I actually got a report through, they fixed it righ away (in definitions v150806-1)!

Interesting how their engine @ VirusTotal.com differs from the one found in their actual client.

@Dayman
Has the bug in the 64bit version that limits the cache size to the same as the 32bit version been fixed in 3.2.3 ?

This fix should have been in 3.2.0

[quote="Dayman"]
This fix should have been in 3.2.0
[/quote]

I installed it today, and it does not appear to have been fixed. Using the default cache size and timeout at 60sec. At 1.9gb it stops. But it does not crash like the 32bit version does. I might be wrong tho, i could test it again.

In 64bit version you can manually set cache size to 4Gb.

Using the default cache size

If you mean (auto), then this setting is handled by libtorrent internally. It usually sets the size to RAM/8

Dayman wrote: In 64bit version you can manually set cache size to 4Gb.

Using the default cache size

If you mean (auto), then this setting is handled by libtorrent internally. It usually sets the size to RAM/8

Yeah, i was using auto. It seems to be recommended to let qbit manage these things on it's own. But if it's set the cache size by ram/8 i guess i have to manually set it, for it to use higher.
It's not something i have the use for all the time, but when my connection really gets going, those 1,98gb are gone within minutes if using the default settings.

those 1,98gb are gone within minutes if using the default settings.

And the problem with that is??

ciaobaby wrote:

those 1,98gb are gone within minutes if using the default settings.

And the problem with that is??

What would the consequence be if the program wants/needs/requires more memory during active download/upload, but none is made available ?

None at all., I guess you probably don't fully understand what the cache is actually there for and what it does.

All that would happen is that it would expire or flush some older cache items before reusing the memory.

[quote="ciaobaby"]
None at all., I guess you probably don't fully understand what the cache is actually there for and what it does.

All that would happen is that it would expire or flush some older cache items before reusing the memory.
[/quote]

Then i guess there isn't a problem.
I think the cache is there for two things, one being as a buffer while the drives are writing during a download with both active download/upload. Two being cache files with a high request rate unless the drive has it's own cache that can hold those files.
The problem i would expect from a full cache is slowed download speeds, which one would want to prevent.