Michael Rogers wrote: > Jano wrote: >> Mmmmm I was wrong. Some of these simulations are ending properly and most >> request are failing with RNF. Even the ones dying because of OOM show >> prevalence of RNF. I'm going to run a more detailed series in the >> critical range where absence of balancing collapses. > > I would guess the RNFs are probably happening because of timeouts - when > a search is not accepted by a peer within a certain amount of time the > handler moves on to the next peer, and returns RNF when it runs out of > peers. Perhaps you could enable logging of timeouts before you run your > series?
Trop tard! Meanwhile, here are some results. This is a run without balancing mechanism, in the range 6..12/0.5. Only simulations for 6, 6.5 and 7.5 finish without OOM, and they're certainly different than the others, so... In any case the first hour is always discarded, so the ones finishing early are doing it after the first hour. I need Michael to confirm that all successes not marked as local are indeed remote. I'll try to narrow to the 6..8 interval, giving some more memory... -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: detail.png Type: image/png Size: 7637 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20061207/308f1d7d/attachment.png>
