Am Dienstag, 30. August 2011, 12:32:17 schrieb Ian Clarke: > 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).
Queueing reduces the total bandwidth needed to transfer a given chunk, because it gives the requests the leeway they need to be able to choose the best route. This results in shorter routes. Actually it is a very simple system which is used in any train station: You wait before you get in instead of just choosing another train and trying to find a different way. And the fewer contacts we have, the more important it gets to choose the right path. Also the increase in latency should be in the range of 20% for CHK requests and SSKs which succeed. Only unsuccessful requests should have a much higher latency than with OLM, because they don?t benefit from the faster transfers (shorter routes). Best wishes, Arne -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 316 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20110830/82b7532f/attachment.pgp>
