> > > Since with nio we can afford to keep 256-512 connections open (and well > > > tuned uber-nodes can go way over 1000), we should rethink whether LRU is > > > still the best strategy for replacing existing connections. Currently > > > the connection that has had least activity is being dropped when a new > > > one is needed. > > Well, we can probably do many thousands of connections (although there > is a minimum overhead of 67+16+16+some objects = well over 100kB per > connection), however we cannot set the default maximum to very high > because we will get into deep guano if we run out of FDs and debian at > least imposes a default (soft) fd limit of 1024.
Firstly, I am rather suspicious of the simple notion that more connections and references is always better. With an idealized view of Freenet's operation, the time required to search Freenet is proportional to log to the base r of N, where r is the number of references per node, and N is the number of nodes in the network. Given this idealized model, it really doesn't make much difference whether r is 100, or whether r is 1000. On the other hand, there are disadvantages to having more references, one of which is that a node has less opportunity to probe each individual reference to get an idea of its reliability. Consequently, we shouldn't just assume that more references are better. Ian. -- Ian Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ Founder, Locutus http://locut.us/ Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
