----- Original Message -----
From: "Benjamin Coates" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 2:19 AM
Subject: RE: [freenet-devl] Another possible bug
> >From Oskar Sandberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> What are people's thoughts on this?
> >
> >I'm still not sure. On the one hand it might help, on the other hand I
> >feel that diskspace is so much cheaper than bandwidth that it feels dumb
> >not to cache stuff. I'd feel better about a weighting system for where in
> >the store the data ends up...
> >
> >--
> >'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
> >'Here,' Montag touched his head.
> >'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
> >
> >Oskar Sandberg
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> If we want more space in Freenet, we should probably be a little more
> agressive about getting it. Right now, for example, the Windows installer
> doesn't even ask how much space to set aside for the datastore, it just
> defaults to (I think) 100MB, not much at all for a modern computer. How
would
> people feel about a node that automatically used some % of the users free
> space?
>
How much would that percentage be, and when is this percentage achieved.
Freenet uses disk space as well, either file or swap. Then the free space
continuesly changes even because of Freenet. Then there's disk usage because
of misc user activities. What happens when the percentage threshold is
overflown?
So the problem with percantages is that a percentage is ever relative, while
100MB is absolute. In my opinion an absolute scheme is simpler and more
realistic.
> --
> Benjamin Coates
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
