Stefan Reich (Sun, Apr 29, 2001 at 01:14:55AM +0200):
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Chris Anderson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > So, the equation becomes, for sufficiently small data values, compress
> > > time + const xfer time vs. const xfer time.
> > >
> > > Of course, once again, feel free to prove me wrong.
> > >
> >
> > No, I agree. In addition, there is usually a several K window size in
> > software based compressors, so the const xfer time is especially true in
> > that case.
>
> Yeah, for the case of very small data packets I agree too.
but we're not talking about compressing the packets, but about compressing
the whole files before inserting them.
> But I still figure there are many cases where compression would make sense
> (large data packets, relatively low bandwidth). And CPU time _is_ cheap,
> even if a Freenet is supposed to be a non-intrusive background process.
>
> It's your decision whether this justifies compressing _any_ data that is
> sent through Freenet... I vote for it anyway.
>
> -Stefan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
--
moritz
In the beginning was the word, and the word was
content-type: text/plain
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
