the art in replication. They can turn a O(lg N) overlay like chord or pastry into
an O(1) overlay purely via replication.
Bob.
On 7/25/06, Matthew Leslie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Julien,
Thanks for your comments! You are right to say that if you use N to mean
exact number of nodes in the network at any time, you will move replicas
around a lot, and that would really suck! The idea is that N is an
estimate of the number of nodes in the network, and there is no need for
it to be exact. The value of N is used to guess at a distance between
replica IDs such that those replica IDs are 'likely' to be owned by
separate nodes. Being out by a few percent is perfectly acceptable. If
your estimate of N is way off, you will get bad guesses at this
distance, and poor performance.
Of course, there are situations where you get large fluctuations in
membership, and you cannot pick a value of single value of N. In these
situations, the symmetric placement function may well be a good choice.
I have infact added symmetric replication to my analysis, and the
results will be available in the journal version of the DAS-P2P paper
you mentioned. I hope to make this available on my website real soon
now. There will also be a much fuller discussion of these issues in my
thesis, which is currently in the final draft stages.
In comparison to other placement functions, I have found that the
symmetric placement function will offer a reliability similar to
successor placement, but with fetch times slightly slower than those
offered by finger replication. I hope that answers some of your
questions, I'd be glad to hear if you have any more.
Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Julien Lociuro
Sent: 22 July 2006 11:16
To: theory and practice of decentralized computer networks
Subject: RE: [Fwd: [p2p-hackers] Dynamic replication - successor
placement]
> There was a discussion about this scheme a while back.
> There is another paper which described another scheme which was
> similar called "Symmetric Replication", which was intended for Chord.
> Maybe that paper answers your questions, it seemed kind of independent
> of the system size. It can be found here:
>
> http://dks.sics.se/pub/replication.pdf
>
> Andersen
Hello Andersen,
Yes I know about the symmetric replication, wich seems good.
But I would like to compare the different schemes.
The paper I provided last time does a comparison between different
schemes.
But there is the question I asked I don't understand and is not referred
in the paper.
So if someone has an idea, or can resend the discussion about it, it
would be great. I can't find it.
Thank you very much.
Julien.
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
_______________________________________________
p2p-hackers mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
_______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
