----- Original Message ----- From: "Benjamin Coates" <[email protected]> To: <devl at freenetproject.org> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 2:19 AM Subject: RE: [freenet-devl] Another possible bug
> >From Oskar Sandberg <oskar at freenetproject.org> > >> What are people's thoughts on this? > > > >I'm still not sure. On the one hand it might help, on the other hand I > >feel that diskspace is so much cheaper than bandwidth that it feels dumb > >not to cache stuff. I'd feel better about a weighting system for where in > >the store the data ends up... > > > >-- > >'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?' > >'Here,' Montag touched his head. > >'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded. > > > >Oskar Sandberg > >oskar at freenetproject.org > > If we want more space in Freenet, we should probably be a little more > agressive about getting it. Right now, for example, the Windows installer > doesn't even ask how much space to set aside for the datastore, it just > defaults to (I think) 100MB, not much at all for a modern computer. How would > people feel about a node that automatically used some % of the users free > space? > How much would that percentage be, and when is this percentage achieved. Freenet uses disk space as well, either file or swap. Then the free space continuesly changes even because of Freenet. Then there's disk usage because of misc user activities. What happens when the percentage threshold is overflown? So the problem with percantages is that a percentage is ever relative, while 100MB is absolute. In my opinion an absolute scheme is simpler and more realistic. > -- > Benjamin Coates > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
