Ed Tomlinson wrote: >> Do we need to store the location for each key? (so that we can update >> the average location when the key is removed) >> Maybe a running average is just good enough? >> Or just store an approximated location, not the actual value? > > A salted location would work as long as the salt had a mean of 0 and was not > all that large (eg. less that the routingMissDistance value).
I believe the salt is added before hashing, so the salted-and-hashed key is effectively random WRT to original key. > I this case, I think we _will_ get more meanfull results from a true average. I agree. Storing the location as a double (which is what we're going to convert it into anyway, so no point storing the full key) only requires an extra 8 bytes per record, right? Cheers, Michael _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
