On Sat, 5 May 2001, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:05:52AM -0400, Chris Anderson wrote: > > On Fri, 4 May 2001, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > < > > > > In which case one could question whether we need a DataLength field. It is > > > a orthogonality verses layering issue, though in this case I think > > > layering wins out... > > > > > > > Doesn't power of 2 data sizes waste 25% of bandwidth & storage? That's > > costly. > > Only for data that is atomic, we expect that most (large) data will be > split into parts. Then it is only 25% of the size modulo the split size > that is wasted. > > The advantages in fighting traffic analysis make it more than worth it. >
Ok, it doesn't look too bad. My current datastore has 500 items and just under 200Mb. Assuming power of 2 padding, here is the wasted space with various split file sizes: split padding (bytes) 1Mb 11.6% (24037464) 512Kb 7.32% (15124568) 256Kb 4.28% (8833112) 128Kb 2.82% (5818456) 64Kb 2.12% (4376664) Since my ds favors small files slightly, this may be an overestimate. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
