Jano wrote: > Here are these results. I'd like to hear your comments, since the clear LIFO > advantage is curious (mind you, in some cases it more than doubles the > other techniques) and maybe it's a simulator artifact.
Very interesting... even accounting for the large amount of variation between runs, LIFO seems to far exceed the throughput at which FIFO collapses (with no flow control in either case - there's no clear advantage to using LIFO if you already have flow control). I've experimented with LIFO instead of FIFO in some simulations of a flooding protocol and it seems to work well there too. > Do we know what's > the typical route length in these simulations? I expected the multi-hop > thing to ruin the intuitively good performance of the single-hop case. I haven't measured the route length I'm afraid; in fact I'm not sure it's well-defined for all searches - what's the route length for an insert that leaves data at multiple branches of the search tree? > Here's a svn diff, in case you see something wrong with my changes: Thanks - the changes look good to me. Cheers, Michael
