Raise the default limits to avoid: #2654

Raise the default limits to avoid: #2654

Bugfixing doesn't work like that.

You have that bug only, nobody else, so that is your bug. You fix it.

You have that bug only

I'm the only one who cares enough to report it.

self.parser.add_argument('--size_limit', help='Default site size limit in MB', default=10, type=int, metavar='limit')

If a user click a link and only load the clicked content have a sense if someone is not interested in the whole website just a part of it. Forums and multi user zite like in Zero Talk with this option, comments will not be displayed properly if the user not allow larger limit.

self.parser.add_argument('--file_size_limit', help='Maximum per file size limit in MB', default=10, type=int, metavar='limit')

The line doesn't make any sense, it just causes problems, no matter what the limit is. Site owners can not share files what larger than the limit. Users can not download files what larger than the limit. The program ask in if the whole site limit larger than 10MB to allow larger limit. But not ask if a current file or files size larger than 10MB (optional and not optional files) to allow larger limit include the largest file in the zite to download default way. Single user sites will be not work correctly this way. That would make sense HTML, CSS, JS, pictiures, PDF these are displayed by the browser. And ask if the zite contains other files if they have already been downloaded to download these as well. All other files could be treated as optional files default way without adding any line in the .json file. Because all other files are what the browser does not display. This is an optional option if the user does not need larger files because the downloads, video files etc will not work this way, or must wait the user to someone seed the files this way. Or select what files want the user like in bittorrent. Default way what the site owner share with the zite they are part of the website without it the website will be unenjoyable. In a single user zite default setup download all files so users have instant access to everything. If anyone has this problem then he will set separately which two other options want.

self.parser.add_argument('--size_limit', help='Default site size limit in MB', default=10, type=int, metavar='limit') self.parser.add_argument('--file_size_limit', help='Maximum per file size limit in MB', default=10, type=int, metavar='limit')
If both lines were completely removed and the limit was not changed, the entire program would work much more efficiently. These are the two preset values only make the program currently unusable. Currently, there would only be benefits to deleting the values completely.

The line doesn't make any sense, it just causes problems, no matter what the limit is.

I think this only applies to required files, not optional files. I think it's a good idea to make big files optional anyway.

Currently, there would only be benefits to deleting the values completely.

So if you accidentally open a malicious site, it will immediately fill up your disk? Sorry, that does not sound like a good idea.

Currently, there would only be benefits to deleting the values completely.

So if you accidentally open a malicious site, it will immediately fill up your disk? Sorry, that does not sound like a good idea.

The program will not work with with these pre-set limits. Web pages can be deleted completely. The system shows that files are loading and what site are downloading files. So they can't load the hard drive either. Even if that happened in mobile devices deletes the user of that page and the problem is resolved. Currently, it would have many more advantages than disadvantages. We need transparent information about the content size of the entire page and not limits. And as optional options for advanced users by not forced all user to this too. And by default, not all users are forced with pre-set limits. The problem is that these features do not work correctly. By removing the two rows which is a few seconds. The whole system would be much more efficient. If ask the system a question from the user like „Site is larger than allowed example 2000MB/10MB set limit to 2000MB” an average user doesn’t even know what it is. It also just causes a problems. And it doesn't even download large optional files if the user set it up. In vain want to get them the user the setup does not do this. The whole thing just limits the operation of the system. A modern website 1-2 GB large. And an optional file are not 10MB or 30MB they are 100MB 500MB and larger. And over 30MB with the new setup nothing can be downloaded in a single site what larger than 10MB or the new setup with 30 MB. I agree with the optional option for advanced users. But the current setup it crashes the whole system. A selective solution would work to separate those files what the browser use to display a web page. And another files video, downloadable content and etc which can be downloaded later. Because they are not required to display the full content of the website. The key thing is not to have to ask for everything to be downloaded. If the user are not prompted for large files then can set an option when the web page loads. But this should not be imposed on those who cannot use it. Because the user will see that the content on the website does not work. By default, the program does not want to decide what file to download and what not. In a single user zite by default, download everything or by the way the content will not work for the user. For publishers the limitations this service is made into a limited storage space on a closed network. And there's the problem the optional parameter must setup in the content.json file and this cannot be set by many website owners. If we limit this would be worth measuring for the storage device and warn the user if example want use the 10% of the current site the full storage.

See the issues: #2622 , #2566, #2243 , #2602,

The line doesn't make any sense, it just causes problems, no matter what the limit is.

I think this only applies to required files, not optional files. I think it's a good idea to make big files optional anyway.

Optional files are limited to 10MB in the right menu. The option is not even found by most users. Even if they click on it, even files what more than 10 megabytes will not be downloaded. The other problem is that nothing indicates the largest file size on the page. And here the option should be set separately to a higher value what the biggest single optional file size in the zite. There is no automatic way to download the full page in a single zite with all files. If the user set higher limit then 10MB and the files are not optional but larger than 10MB the download just doesn't work again. Optional files also have a preset 10MB limit. Almost no one can use this option. There are few visitors and they can’t use almost any option which is a little more complicated. It’s really not good for the program to decide for itself that, however, it refuses to download large optional files. These preset restrictions they simply prevent you from downloading large files easily. And then there's that site owners need to setup the optional parameters. And not all website owners can do that. In multi user zites like Zero Up if the option are set up there it downloads all user files. All files which is less than 10MB and it can be several terabytes under 10MB files.

Sorry, it was difficult to get through your rant, and I don't get your point. You said modern sites are 1-2 GiB each. An average user browses at least 100 sites. Do you think that using 100-200 GiB of disk storage is acceptable? That is worse, people will get angry because ZeroNet eats up their disk space, not because of a notification. And if someone doesn't know what a megabyte is, they'd better leave ZeroNet, there are enough idiots on the Clearnet.

Yes, 200GB is perfectly acceptable. Not everyone using ZeroNet in the first place so those who will run with these limits already aware what is going on. 10 MB sites are a big joke, a video included in a site would immediately trigger the request for allow more space, other users would freak out when they get the notification to allow more space.

@mx5kevin I don't have homepage and I use absolutely nothing which is shipped in ZeroNet and not necessary for running the software, meaning that all plugin including UiFileManager and HelloZeroNet for me is non-existent.

@imachug nowadays everyone has a pendrive with capacity around 256GB, 512GB, and 1TB.
I do run ZeroNet only from external storage with large free space in a virtual environment.

Lastly, those who don't have @HelloZeroNet home page will never ever get a notification about the file size in the first place.

Yes, 200GB is perfectly acceptable

Heck, some of the devices I'm running ZeroNet on don't have half of that, and other devices don't have half so much free space. Most disk drive that are installed in modern laptops are 256 to 512 GiB, Windows/Linux/Mac OS (bonus points if you do dual boot) take up at least a quarter of that, user data takes up a lot of space too. Do you want to know the reason why people use web apps instead of installing them? -- right, because they take up space.

nowadays everyone has a pendrive with capacity around 256GB, 512GB, and 1TB.

First: many people, not everyone. Second: that capacity is not for ZeroNet exclusively.

Lastly, those who don't have @HelloZeroNet home page will never ever get a notification about the file size in the first place.

You are several years behind the mainline.

Anyway what is the problem? I raised the default file size limit to 30MB and the site size limit to 1024MB what's your problem with this @imachug. ZeroNet is not a "web app" and all site/file you visit/open you will download and seed as well.

Having a 10MB site size limit, while the file size limit is also 10MB is stupid as fck! Downloading a few big file, may make your CSS, fonts and even HTML files to fail downloading and so makes your site unusable!

Downloading a few big file, may make your CSS, fonts and even HTML files to fail downloading and so makes your site unusable!

Files are downloaded in a specific order so this usually shouldn't happen. If it does, please send me how to reproduce the issue.

I raised the default file size limit to 30MB and the site size limit to 1024MB what's your problem with this

I don't want to accidentally download a whole 1 GiB of content (possibly illegal) in background. 10 MiB is a good limit for basic code and some text. When there's not enough space for user data, a nice notification pops up with a big 'Increase size' text on it, so I judge if the site is important to me and if it is, I allow the increase.

While? Torrent is not illegal? You talk BS. The FILE LIMIT IS 30 MB! NOT 1 GB!

NOT 1 GB!

But site limit is.

Torrent is not illegal?

Not all of them are illegal, like not all ZeroNet sites are illegal. The difference is that most torrent clients show you the list of files while ZeroNet does not.

imachug your idea to download small parts of everything doesn’t work in practice. All such solutions make the content inaccessible. I say this from experience as zite and file owner. And after years of torrenting, where there is a basis for comparison. The result of all such efforts will be that the content will not be available for the users.

Allow the increase site limit popup option does not download optional or large files.

As zite and file owner I can tell from experience the half-downloaded files an inoperable thing. The single files and downloading just part of a single zite too. If the entire content is not downloaded the are no seeders in single user zites and files too. No one other than the content owner will share the content. It is a waste of resources. In torrent always download all users the entire content. And there is no limit to how big the files or total file size in the torrent can be. The total content size of the website must be showed and who needs to download it, who doesn’t delete it. ZeroNet is a P2P network the user pays to help share the file. That someone downloads a little bit of everything inoperable on such a network. It’s like stealing the content owner who seed the file. There are communities on the network that regularly use specific sites. Casual visitors do not seed the content. Visiting 100 sites a day is not necessarily well-intentioned. There is no need for malicious scanner visitors on the network. And this network was not invented for this. Preset site size limit in MB, does not make sense because it just crash sites. It is worth looking at how much user storage space is available. And to measure that how much space the content takes up. Today there are a lot of big data storage 300GB 500GB already basic in a old pc. 2TB 4TB 10TB are basic in modern PC and 5G are coming. Limiting files and zites how many MB can be default way are pointless the same limit in a 10GB storage and 10TB storage. Today it is an average website 1-2 GB large, it will be even bigger in the future. Hundreds of megabytes of files 10MB-1,5GB are not uncommon on websites. Everyone wants everything right away. And this is not possible if users download incomplete pages and files. The downside to this is the need for disk space. This can be freed by deleting the files and zites which are not regularly visited. It cannot be based on a clearnet service because there is no stable bandwidth, no 24/7 online users.

In torrent always download all users the entire content

Sorry, what? You are kind of wrong.

@imachug what should be the limit for files and sites? Be reasonable.

Most sites on ZeroNet that I host are under 10 MB. My response is obvious.

I'm okay about increasing required file limit from 1 MB to 10 MB though.