On Tuesday 05 August 2008 17:13, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Your backtracking code will backtrack forever and visit every node if > > necessary ... could this skew the simulation results? I suggest you increment > > depth just before calling n.request() in request(), this would be a closer > > approximation with the same simulation performance, and more accurate path > > lengths. > > It does seem excessive to search every node within 10 hops, but OTOH > depth isn't meant to be an accurate representation of HTL - the aim is > to find out how many nodes you'd have to visit to find the data > (visited.size()) and how many nodes would cache the data on the return > path (depth).
Well, a small world network has a low diameter almost by definition ... you're sure it won't skew the results? Could you make the proposed change and re-run and see if it makes any difference to the outcome? (I'd expect more hops, more failures, so a more pronounced difference??) > > > Also, do you use the request rate code? > > No, there are no bandwidth limits in these simulations and the network > only handles one request at a time - I had to strip out as much as > possible to be able to simulate more than 100 nodes. Okay so it's just left-over code. > > Cheers, > Michael -------------- 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/20080805/e6501bdd/attachment.pgp>
