Hi Wang, My results with Chord, Pastry and Kademlia are shown in this paper (draft):
"Churn Tolerance Improvement Techniques in an Algorithm-neutral DHT" http://www.shudo.net/publications/AIMS-2009-churn-resilience/shudo-AIMS-2009-churn-resilience.pdf The results are heavily dependent on the parameters of each routing algorithms as you pointed out. It is difficult to derive general rules but my feeling is that Chord with proper parameters is not so weak in churn compared with Kademlia. It's just feeling. Kazuyuki Shudo 2...@shudo.net http://www.shudo.net/ > Message-ID: <60b162860906072311l7942bc80qf8540f8751acb...@mail.gmail.com> > From: Wang Danqi <beyond...@gmail.com> > Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2009 14:11:08 +0800 > Hi all, > > I have implemented both Chord and Kademlia in my simulator according to the > Chord paper in Sigcomm'01 and Kademlia paper in IPTPS'02 respectively. I ran > a simulation with 1000 nodes and 1000 keys. The user arrival pattern follows > a Poisson distribution and the lifespan is exponentially distributed. 1000 > queries are generated for each key after every node gets online. However, I > found the results from the two designs are significantly different. Chord > performs much worse than Kademlia in terms of the fraction of successful > queries, and it highly relies on the routing table refresh interval. Do you > have any experience like this? I doubt whether Chord is so poor or I made > some mistake in implementation. > > Thank you so much for your help. > > > -- > Best wishes, > > Wang Danqi _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
