Am Freitag, 2. September 2011, 12:20:02 schrieb Ian Clarke: > On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 8:00 AM, Matthew Toseland <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > > WE NEED MORE DATA. > > Well, my gut tells me that our existing scheme is likely too complicated to > fix unless we are extremely fortuitous, however I'm happy to be wrong about > that if others think that they have a good understanding of why we're having > problems and how to fix them.
If the load balancer does not have some hidden delicacies, there is a very
simple check to see if my understanding is right.
Since SSKs are mostly unsuccessfull and are about 50% of the requests, the
bandwidth limiter essentially targets 50% of the bandwidth.
Setting my bandwidth to about 150% of my actual bandwidth should make it guess
my bandwidth more correctly, leaving 25% free for bursting¹.
Currently the mean bandwidth with NLM and AIMDs for me is about 50 kB/s on a
setting of 90kB/s outgoing.
My line can handle about 120kB/s outgoing.
So I set the bandwidth setting to 180kB/s.
If I am right, Freenet should then consume about 90kB/s on average.
If it stays at 50-60, that’s likely a limitation of my peers → no useful data
→ test would have to be done on a slower line or with more peers.
If it goes down or I get very many timeouts, then I‘m likely wrong.
It would be nice if some other people could replicate that.
Note: I just disabled my testnet node to avoid skewing the data.
Best wishes,
Arne
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
