On Monday 01 September 2003 07:17 pm, Zlatin Balevsky wrote:
> >A. If both are guaranteed to exist then A is better.
>
> at least 90% of the time neither file will exist.
If 90% of the data being requested does not exist, the network is in bad
shape.
> >If both maxout without finding anything, t
On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Tom Kaitchuck wrote:
> However the data is further away
> than maxHtl/2 then it is fairly likly that the other file is too.
Why do you think that?
-todd
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 08:17:55PM -0400, Zlatin Balevsky wrote:
> >A. If both are guaranteed to exist then A is better.
>
> at least 90% of the time neither file will exist.
Why exactly can't you request both then?
>
> >If both maxout without finding anything, then you ask the same number of
A. If both are guaranteed to exist then A is better.
at least 90% of the time neither file will exist.
If both maxout without finding anything, then you ask the same number of nodes
ether way.
In theory yes. In practice, there will be plenty of QR-ing, restarting, etc. If one request RNFs, t
On Monday 01 September 2003 04:47 pm, Tom Kaitchuck wrote:
> The ideal solution would be to select to ether get file A or B baised on
> which is closest to your specialization, or you think you can get the
> fastest.
Intriguing. So then, should there be an FCP extension for NGR?
--
http://earth.p
On Monday 01 September 2003 02:14 pm, Zlatin Balevsky wrote:
> Suppose I insert two files with the same size but different CHKs at the
> same htl. Both files will be equally popular (this can be guaranteed).
> I need to get just one of the files and want to do that in a way that
> will be least st
Suppose I insert two files with the same size but different CHKs at the
same htl. Both files will be equally popular (this can be guaranteed).
I need to get just one of the files and want to do that in a way that
will be least stressfull to the network. Which one is the optimal solution:
a)
