On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 11:13:23PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote:
> On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:25:01AM -0700, Ian Clarke spake thusly:
> > > I have friends who are really into bittorrent. bittorrent does not have
> > > the problem of data falling out of the network so easily (ie. much more
> > > reliable)
> > 
> > This simply isn't true - you can only get data in BitTorrent from people 
> > who have specifically downloaded the thing you are looking for and who 
> > leave their client running - Freenet spreads content beyond those that 
> > are specifically downloading it meaning that data's longevity is likely 
> > to be much better with Freenet.
> 
> I think it is true that it is more reliable and data doesn't fall out. And
> for the very reason you stated: You get the data from people who have
> downloaded the content. I am currently having MUCH more trouble retrieving
> things with freenet than with bittorrent.
> 
> > No, but you do need to deal with Python, and I haven't heard too many 
> > reports of trouble from people that can't get Java installed in a while 
> > now.
> 
> Python came pre-installed on my system and there are no python-vm quirks
> or incompatibilities that I am aware of.
> 
> > I have yet to see clear evidence of this and my personal experience is 
> > that the two are very similar in-terms of speed.  I wish someone would 
> > do a direct comparison.
> 
> They used to be fairly close if you had the memory and cpu power to run a
> lot of download threads. Lately freenet has become a dog for splitfiles.
> 60 download threads to get 90k/s with freenet makes most other tasks on my
> dual 500Mhz PIII with 512M of RAM a bit difficult. Bittorrent can download
> at that speed using far less memory and cpu. I would do a direct
> comparison but an insert of a test file of any size would take forever.
> 
> > That is strange, I have had no such problems.  I think one issue is that
> > some download clients (such as Fuqid) default to a 5% heal percentage, I
> > believe this should be 100% by default.
> 
> I have tried to get files varying from 30M to a couple hundred meg lately
> with little luck. I did have success on one of three such files last
> night.

I have downloaded two very large splitfiles on a two week old node, the
first time, the other node which is slightly younger seems to be doing okay
with a third splitfile.
> 
> -- 
> Tracy Reed      
> http://ultraviolet.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20030523/6ea19779/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to