On Sat, 5 May 2001, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> On Fri, May 04, 2001 at 11:05:52AM -0400, Chris Anderson wrote:
> > On Fri, 4 May 2001, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> < >
> > > In which case one could question whether we need a DataLength field. It is
> > > a orthogonality verses layering issue, though in this case I think
> > > layering wins out...
> > >
> >
> > Doesn't power of 2 data sizes waste 25% of bandwidth & storage? That's
> > costly.
>
> Only for data that is atomic, we expect that most (large) data will be
> split into parts. Then it is only 25% of the size modulo the split size
> that is wasted.
>
> The advantages in fighting traffic analysis make it more than worth it.
>
Ok, it doesn't look too bad. My current datastore has 500 items and just
under 200Mb. Assuming power of 2 padding, here is the wasted space with
various split file sizes:
split padding (bytes)
1Mb 11.6% (24037464)
512Kb 7.32% (15124568)
256Kb 4.28% (8833112)
128Kb 2.82% (5818456)
64Kb 2.12% (4376664)
Since my ds favors small files slightly, this may be an overestimate.
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
