On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 12:37:29AM +0200, Jusa Saari wrote: > I'm running stable build 5046. Currently, I have 49 nodes in my routing > table, 45 which are contacted. Of these 45, only 4 a not backed off > currently. At no time have I observed more than 6 nodes being not backed > up. > > Now then. If I understood correctly, this means that my node only has 4 > other nodes it can route all requests to. I would imagine this doing nasty > things to routing (if it doesn't, then why have such a large routing table > to begin with ?), and of course those 4 nodes aren't likely to like the > flood of requests either. > > Also, my own node can only handle about 2000 requests per hour before > going to rejecting all state because of thread limit. With NGRouting, the > same node got 10000+ QPH (and was in "reject all" or "reject most" all the > time. > > So... As far as I can tell, the biggest problem right now is load. Not > load balancing, but the total amount of load. Freenet simply cannot > currently handle the amount of requests made. > > I wonder if most nodes rejecting most queries isn't at least partially to > blame for NGRoutings failure - after all, if we can't route to the "best" > node, but have to take whatever node happens to let us through, then > routing will be essentially random, with just a small bias towards the > "better" nodes (since they will be tried first - but backing up will take > away even that, since they won't be even tried). > > So, please, optimize ! Make a binary message format (faster to parse, I'd > assume), better NIO, multiplexing connections, _anything_ that will let > nodes handle more requests. And for pity's sake, remove the "backing off > on QueryReject" -feature; at least give the node a chance to relay to the > best node ! Premature optimization might be the root of all evil, but it > seems to me it's either optimize or get everyone an AMD64 ;). > > Anyway, it's completely pointless to search for better routing methods, > untill a node can actually send it's messages to the node chosen by that > routing method, as opposed to having that node QueryReject and the > messsage forwarded to a more or less random node... > > And no, load balancing won't help; it's a matter of total load exceeding > total resources. You can't divide 10 tons to be carried by 10 people, no > matter how hard you try.
Where do you think the load comes from? And where are you going to send it? Why do you think we implemented NIO? Why do you think we implemented backoff? The purpose of backoff is primarily to REDUCE TOTAL LOAD. Please make a consistent argument. -- 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
