On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > wrote:
> On Monday 29 Aug 2011 18:58:26 Ian Clarke wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Matthew Toseland < > > Right, the same is true of queueing. If nodes are forced to do things to > > deal with overloading that make the problem worse then the load balancing > > algorithm has failed. Its job is to prevent that from happening. > > Not true. Queueing does not make anything worse (for bulk requests where we > are not latency sensitive). **When a request is waiting for progress on a > queue, it is not using any bandwidth!** > I thought there was some issue where outstanding requests occupied "slots" or something? Regardless, even if queueing doesn't use additional bandwidth or CPU resources, it also doesn't use any less of these resources - so it doesn't actually help to alleviate any load (unless it results in a timeout in which case it uses more of everything). And it does use more of one very important resource, which is the initial requestor's time. I mean, ultimately the symptom of overloading is that requests take longer, and queueing makes that problem worse. Queueing should be a last resort, the *right* load balancing algorithm should avoid situations where queueing must occur. Ian. -- Ian Clarke Founder, The Freenet Project Email: ian at freenetproject.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20110830/9afc084e/attachment.html>
