Re: [freenet-support] number of connections
On Mon, Jan 26, 2004 at 06:32:36AM -0600, Conrad J. Sabatier wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 11:21:14PM -0800, Steven wrote: > > since multiplexing has been ported to the stable branch of freenet, we can > > have a MUCH lower maxConnection setting right? I used allow 300, now I only > > allow 20. Is this a bad idea? > > 20 connections max is quite low. You have to allow a certain number of > connections for the nodes in your routing table, for one thing. It's a > wonder your node even runs at all. > > Try setting it to something more reasonable, like, say, 128 or 256. You'll > most likely never hit that number with multiplexing, but it's good to allow > the node some breathing room. > > > I've had a lot of traffic on my node, and everything seems to be working fine > > (although connecting initially took forever) according to the numbers, but i > > can't retrieve much. > > >From what I'm reading lately, it seems that content accessibility is > actually better these days with unstable. :-) > > Although, I just noticed someone inserted a new version of their site > ([EMAIL PROTECTED]/Jukebox/6// "The Jukebox of DJ Free") > with a bunch of activelinks added at the bottom that I haven't been able to > retrieve in a very long time. So I'm thinking maybe certain content is only > reachable in one or the other. They are separate networks. Some people, such as the author of TFHI, insert content on both networks at once. But for other stuff, the only way it propagates from one to another is people switching branches and taking their stores with them. > > -- > Conrad Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - "In Unix veritas" -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] number of connections
On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 11:21:14PM -0800, Steven wrote: > since multiplexing has been ported to the stable branch of freenet, we can > have a MUCH lower maxConnection setting right? I used allow 300, now I only > allow 20. Is this a bad idea? 20 connections max is quite low. You have to allow a certain number of connections for the nodes in your routing table, for one thing. It's a wonder your node even runs at all. Try setting it to something more reasonable, like, say, 128 or 256. You'll most likely never hit that number with multiplexing, but it's good to allow the node some breathing room. > I've had a lot of traffic on my node, and everything seems to be working fine > (although connecting initially took forever) according to the numbers, but i > can't retrieve much. >From what I'm reading lately, it seems that content accessibility is actually better these days with unstable. :-) Although, I just noticed someone inserted a new version of their site ([EMAIL PROTECTED]/Jukebox/6// "The Jukebox of DJ Free") with a bunch of activelinks added at the bottom that I haven't been able to retrieve in a very long time. So I'm thinking maybe certain content is only reachable in one or the other. -- Conrad Sabatier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - "In Unix veritas" ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [freenet-support] number of connections
Well, If it works fine for you I think you should keep it. But.. Remember that for each connection that needs to be negotiated (the more ones allowed the less needs to be established), this increases you CPU load. Another issue is that fred requires you to allow for at least two connections per node in your rt.. If you have configured your node to allow only 20 connections your routing table will be reduces to only 10 nodes.. /N > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steven > Sent: den 25 januari 2004 08:21 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [freenet-support] number of connections > > > since multiplexing has been ported to the stable branch of > freenet, we can > have a MUCH lower maxConnection setting right? I used allow > 300, now I only > allow 20. Is this a bad idea? > > I've had a lot of traffic on my node, and everything seems to > be working fine > (although connecting initially took forever) according to the > numbers, but i > can't retrieve much. > > > ___ > Support mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.su> pport > > Unsubscribe at > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [freenet-support] number of connections + question about node refs
> I've limited the amount of connections my node can make to > 50. I don't know > how this effects the network, how it effects my node's > ability find files or > anything, all I know is this keeps freenet from eating all of > my system's > resources. Please tell me if their is a better way. What kind of resources? Memory, CPU or bandwidth? The main argument for allowing more connections to be open is that it is very expensive (CPU-wise) to open a new connection.. If you allow for more connections to stay open then less connections will need to be opened. Also.. You should never allow less than 2*50 connections if you are running with the default routing table size since the node needs to be able to keep two connections open per entry in the rt. /N ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Re: [freenet-support] number of connections + question about node refs
On 2003-12-11T01:48:26-0800, Steven wrote: > $ netstat | grep -c tcp > 370 As you wrote, the above also counts non-freenet connections. It also counts connections already closed by freenet (by your node or the other one), but TCP still keeps them just in case there is still a packet flying arround in the Internet. try something like $ netstat -pn | grep -c 'tcp.*ESTABLISHED.*java' This assumes you are the owner of the freenet process. It counts only connections made by a process called 'java' which are not half closed or waiting. > I assume that these are OUTGOING connections, and this is > normal, but I just wanted to be sure. You are right. > As my node "learns" more about the network, it "meets" a lot of other nodes. > Does Fred automatically change seednodes.ref as time goes by? No. > do I need to manually save all of these new refs? No. The only time you need this is when somebody else doesn't want to download seednodes.ref from the web and has more trust in your file. > How can I do this? go to http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodestatus/noderefs.txt?minConnections=1 and save the result. Note that the seednodes.ref file is only used at startup and only if it is newer than the rtprops_? files in the startup directory. $ touch seednodes.ref $ ./start-freenet.sh > Is NGR really working? I would say: not yet. Currently you can chose between stable (w/o NGR) and unstable (w/ NGR). Kendy -- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
