On November 19, 2003 07:44 am, Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> On November 19, 2003 03:51 am, Niklas Bergh wrote:
> > > On November 18, 2003 08:52 am, Martin Stone Davis wrote:
> > > > We already back-off due to QR, so we already have a way of telling
> > > > when every node is going to be ready. �The issue here is
> > >
> > > adding that
> > >
> > > > back-off time to the estimate() so that we can tell if the best
> > > > strategy for a given query is to wait for the node to not be backed
> > > > off or to go with an available node.
> > >
> > > Thinking about it, I can see a fairly simple change to out
> > > acceptance logic that will might help.  Let say we work like this.
> > >
> > > IF key is in the DS or Failure table      \\ sames as now
> > >   respond with DNF or data
> > > IF loadEstimate fails request                     \\ same as now
> > >   respond with QR
> > >
> > > \\ probalistic QR disabled for now
> > >
> > > generate the routing object
> > >
> > > if the probability of finding a route using the top X nodes
> > > (where            \\ we just look at pSF
> > >           backed off nodes have a pSF of 1.0) is less
> > > than 0.xx                 \\ no messages are sent
> > >   respond with QR

Thinking about this a bit, we should probably DNF here.  QRs do not 
depend on the key requested,  the above will so a DNF is the thing to 
do.

Ed

> > > Reset the above object's getNextRoute to the top of the table
> > > and proceed as we do now
> > >
> > > What this will do is allow us to accept requests that we
> > > probably can route using a good
> > > route.   We want to recheck the backoff time when we actually
> > > route, maybe the backoff
> > > expired while we tried another node.
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to