Ian Clarke wrote:
> Great, but should be be deprecating any of the old stuff? I would
> rather not keep broken code lying around if we can help it.
There is nothing broken left in... Except that I was unhappy that
one conf value could "override" another. I would rather force the
user to comment
On Wed, Jul 03, 2002 at 12:10:06AM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Very nice. I won't use the average limit, but the max limit is useful.
Great, but should be be deprecating any of the old stuff? I would
rather not keep broken code lying around if we can help it.
Ian.
--
Ian Clarke
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 09:27:03PM +0100, Christopher William Turner wrote:
> Matthew Toseland wrote:
>
> > Very nice. Do our overall per second limits still not work? Last I saw
> > they set each connection's limit to 10% of the overall limit, but since
> > we can have many connections, this is
Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Very nice. Do our overall per second limits still not work? Last I saw
> they set each connection's limit to 10% of the overall limit, but since
> we can have many connections, this is unreliable - and also, does
> whatever there is now work with your changes?
Yes. The
On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 08:34:53PM +0100, Christopher William Turner wrote:
> My average bandwidth throttled node settles down to exactly track its
> defined long-term weekly traffic limits. Any nodes in contact with it
> will be slowed to match it (if they don't lose patience and timeout).
> They
My average bandwidth throttled node settles down to exactly track its
defined long-term weekly traffic limits. Any nodes in contact with it
will be slowed to match it (if they don't lose patience and timeout).
They don't get rejected.
Currently serverSockets get created with a fixed backlog of 50
On Tuesday 02 July 2002 04:04, Oskar wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 11:26:59PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > On Monday 01 July 2002 20:21, you wrote:
> ...
> > > >I have read in one post that there is a limit of 60 requests per
> > > > minute. It is almost 100 times slower than node cou
On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 11:26:59PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Monday 01 July 2002 20:21, you wrote:
< >
> > I have implemented a fix for this, along the lines that were discussed
> > many weeks ago (and optional representation of the NodeReference that
> > does not include the identity, w
Gianni Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > layer). However, when I commit this it means a protocol upgrade that
> > breaks backwards compatibility (*), so I'm holding back a few hours
> > pending objections.
> Do it, I don't object.
>
The protocol is still beta. Improve the node.
> I hav
On Monday 01 July 2002 20:21, you wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Roman Bednarek wrote:
> <>
>
> >Maybe such big requests are a serious problem to freenet? I want to
> > add request size logging to my node. Could you advice me where to put the
> > log to catch all incoming a
On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 11:35:34AM +0200, Roman Bednarek wrote:
<>
>Maybe such big requests are a serious problem to freenet? I want to add
> request size logging to my node. Could you advice me where to put the log
> to catch all incoming and outgoing requests?
I have implemented a fix for t
On Mon, 1 Jul 2002, Roman Bednarek wrote:
>
>
> On 26 Jun 2002, Edgar Friendly wrote:
>
> > Roman Bednarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > > Recently I was working with the Tomcat Servlet engine, my servlet was
> > > generating gifs on the fly. It was able to process about 30-5
On 26 Jun 2002, Edgar Friendly wrote:
> Roman Bednarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Hi.
> > Recently I was working with the Tomcat Servlet engine, my servlet was
> > generating gifs on the fly. It was able to process about 30-50
> > requests/second on a standard PC ( 500Mhz ). Taking tha
Roman Bednarek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi.
> Recently I was working with the Tomcat Servlet engine, my servlet was
> generating gifs on the fly. It was able to process about 30-50
> requests/second on a standard PC ( 500Mhz ). Taking that into account I
> guess freenet should handle over
Hi.
Recently I was working with the Tomcat Servlet engine, my servlet was
generating gifs on the fly. It was able to process about 30-50
requests/second on a standard PC ( 500Mhz ). Taking that into account I
guess freenet should handle over 100 requests/second, because most
requests (when the
15 matches
Mail list logo
