On Wednesday 09 May 2007 12:03, Michael Rogers wrote: > Juiceman wrote: > >>> the 50:50 > >>> split seems pretty arbitrary; it should be configurable. > >> > >> Why, so each user can choose a different arbitrary value instead of > >> everyone using the same arbitrary value? > > > > Well, I for one, would like to be a "deep cache" for long term > > storage, others like Bob would like to cache as much as possible > > immediately. I think Freenet could benefit from this. > > Would it be possible to dynamically balance the amount of space > allocated to the cache and store? Here's what I have in mind: when the > cache is below its quota and a key is cached, remove the least recently > used key from the store instead of the cache. And vice versa: when the > store is below its quota and a key is stored, remove the least recently > used key from the cache. That way we don't waste any space while the > store is filling up (the cache uses the free space), and if we later > change the quotas it will gradually move to the new quotas instead of > having to resize the whole thing at once.
Yes, it's possible. File a bug for it; there are definitely related bugs already filed. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20070509/f90e2c40/attachment.pgp>
