On Wed, Aug 6, 2008 at 11:50 PM, Michael Rogers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 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?
We digest the key in data store to prevent enumeration of keys in the store. If we store the actual location, it would defect this purpose.. I suggest storing the location as float, which is only 4 bytes and may enumeration much more difficult. > Cheers, > Michael > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
