On Thu, Dec 04, 2003 at 06:20:35PM -0800, Martin Stone Davis wrote: > Toad wrote: > > >m0davis suggested that we should use pSearchFailed (or more detailed > >stats), despite backoff. The reason we don't do this is that if we did, > >a node in the RT would get a few queries and then its pSearchFailed > >would increase, and subsequently it would not be routed to at all for a > >very long time, because of it's very high estimate. This is the reason > >that the running averages are not appropriate for QRs and timeouts - > >because they don't recover. If we did use them, we would have to also > >have a mechanism to ensure that the nodes were contacted after they > >ceased to be backed off, DESPITE their bad estimates. This was a > >significant part of the justification behind instating backoff in the > >first place. > > Let me try to put my suggestion for reinstating pSearchFailed in > context. Implicit in my derivation of estimate() was that all of the > estimators used in the formula were as accurate as reasonably possible. > The worse the estimators, the worse routing will be. Therefore, it is > out of the question to be unrealistically optimistic about new nodes. > For a completely new node, we should either use the global estimators, > or ask other nodes for estimator data on the it.
I don't see how what you are talking about is relevant to what I was talking about :) I oppose using a running average for pSearchFailed specifically because it would not be accurate - most nodes have longish periods of rejecting most queries, then recover. But our pSearchFailed would go really high, and then we wouldn't route to the node. > > I don't know what the objections to this proposal might be. It suppose > some might say that we would not route to new nodes often enough. But > exactly how much is "enough"? > > It might also be objected that we would eventually not route to new > nodes if we used global estimators. But that simply isn't true. Since > global estimators are based on the nodes we actually route to, they are > a bit more optimistic than average. However, for any particular key, > the global estimator isn't more optimistic than our best node. > Therefore, new nodes would be queried if we got QRs or DNFs in the top > "half" of the "specialized" bunch. > > -Martin > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- 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
