On Sat, 17 May 2003, Toad wrote: > I would like to point out here that > transparent portability to arbitrary future or obscure platforms IS NOT > AND NEVER HAS BEEN A CORE PROJECT GOAL.
Great! Then we can begin reimplementation of fred in C? This would have the added benefit of reducing CPU usage. I would argue that getting as close as possible to "transparent portability" *is* and *always has been* a core project goal. 'Core' in the fullest sense of the word. > Since load balancing is fairly critical to a functioning > Freenet, I would like to add this code to Fred at least as an option. > Does anyone agree with me? It's gonna be messy. However, handling CPU load is definitely an issue, and it may be that, at this time, installing platform specific code to attack the symptom is more important to the functioning of the network than finding the cause. At this time. On the other hand, if the symptom goes away then motivation to find the cause may go away as well. In any event, if CPU load monitoring gets put in, please make it an option (as you said) and please make it easy to factor out. Also, as someone who isn't even working on the problem, I thank you for doing so. -todd _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
