On Sun, Feb 23, 2003 at 04:11:13PM -0500, Jay Oliveri wrote: > Small misunderstanding.. > > On Sunday 23 February 2003 03:51 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > It is kludgy to say the least if you're inserting data into Fred from > > > another machine. The data sent back and forth over the wire (even > > > through localhost) is simply unecessary and wasteful. > > > > Is this an argument for or against doing FEC in Fred? It looks like it > > is for. > > I mean that currently, FEC encoding requires the client to: > > 1) send the entire file to Fred. > 2) receive the entire file, plus check blocks from Fred. > 3) insert the data and check blocks. > > If ezFCPlib did the encoding, steps 1 and 2 would be removed from the > process. When someone inserts a 40M movie file (or an average CD track in > .wav format), Fred must handle at least 120M of data (40 to Fred; step 1, > 40 from Fred; step 2, then finally 40M of data/check blocks to insert).
Actually it's worse than that: 40 to fred, 60 back, 60 to insert for a total of 160MB ! However, FCP is simple precisely because it is stateless. A FEC insert would be a far more complex operation than anything that FCP is used for now, and would likely use AutoRequester... hence the suggestion that it maybe should be handled outside of the node. > > -- > Jay Oliveri "In the land of the blind, > GnuPG ID: 0x5AA5DD54 the one-eyed man is king." > FCPTools Maintainer > www.sf.net/users/joliveri -- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Full time freenet hacker. http://freenetproject.org/ Freenet Distribution Node (temporary) at http://0.0.0.0:8889/Sc60KWoUsCU/ ICTHUS.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
