On Thursday 25 October 2001 16:18, degs wrote: > On Thursday 25 October 2001 16:13, Timm Murray wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > It occurred to me that there might be some benefit to inserting > > > freesites as a single redundant splitfile containing an archive of the > > > site. (Or two archives - one for the static portion and one for today's > > > insert). > > > > I've suggested this before. The only thing is that viewing Freenet as a > > whole, it's better to make lots of requests (thus making nodes learn more > > about the network). From the point of view of an individual node > > operator, it's better to make fewer requests, thus making the whole > > process shorter for that specific set of requests. I think this is one > > area where we must find a balance between what is good for the network > > and what is good for an individual user. > > Choosing a small splitfile size would keep the number of requests similar I mean *chunk* size. > to simply requesting the un-archived site, but with the added advantage of > redunancy so it should benefit the user requesting the without being > detrimental to the network. > > degs > > _______________________________________________ > 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
