On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> wrote: > On Wednesday 29 April 2009 23:12:09 bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: >> Could a client keep the top block available by requesting it lets say >> once per day? >> When the MaxSize option is used this could be a cheap request. > > No. It might help if it was from a different location on the network each > time, but this would require something resembling tunnels, which we don't > have yet. Right now it would just ensure that your node cached it, and if you > told it to ignore the local datastore, that your nearest neighbour to the key > cached it. > > Further, this does not solve the fundamental problem, which is that data will > fall out of caches quickly, and is only stored on 3 nodes, and there's a good > chance of all 3 of them being offline, or having left, at the time of the > fetch. Although we do try to deal with this to some degree by ignoring low > uptime nodes when calculating whether we are a sink ( = whether to store an > insert in the store). Another issue is tolerance of weakness in specific > areas of the keyspace. We have redundancy for lower down blocks, it makes > sense to have redundancy for the top block. > > Is the length of a DHK a problem?
Short Answer: No. Long Answer: A CHK@ is 100 character long, which is wider then "screen width" (80). Adding the "http://...:8888/"; prefix, it would become 122 character... this is much longer then most people can read and memorize, it is wider then many browser location bar -- so, adding extra length to it won't have any perceptible different.
