On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 04:05:36PM +0000, Ian Clarke wrote: > Toad wrote: > > >On Tue, Nov 25, 2003 at 03:26:41PM +0000, Ian Clarke wrote: > >>Toad wrote: > >>>Load balancing and routing are inseparable in their effects. Routing > >>>can't work if it can't route to close to its first choice. HOWEVER it > >>>seems to be managing this mostly - the stats suggest we typically route > >>>to our second choice, which is a lot better than it used to be. > >> > >>Ed claims that his node is accepting about 10% of requests, if true, and > >>his node is typical, then it is unlikely that most nodes get to route to > >>their second preference. > > > >Do you think we need more NIO work on trailers etc? It would seem that > >nodes accept a bunch of trailers and then overload for a while on > >threads - so effectively we DO have a bandwidth based QR, it's just a > >delayed effect. This may be bad for routing... > > I find it hard to believe that the problem could be due to a lack of > NIO, given that this problem did not occur back when we had no NIO > whatsoever. This isn't to say that NIO doesn't help, I just feel that > it is unlikely to be the crux of the problem.
We had a lot less connections, a lot less queries, and we DID have overload problems. Constantly. Overload problems have existed in Freenet forever. > > Ian. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
