As long as everyone keeps inserting everything onto all nodes, the Freenet search algorithm won't work. There will be no way to follow a path to a particular node where the data is stored, if all nodes have approximately the same data. This causes requests to fail, so people try to fix it by inserting onto more nodes, thereby making the problem worse.
Hal _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl >From - Fri Apr 20 11:46:52 2001 Return-Path: <devl-admin at freenetproject.org> Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (postfix@[4.18.42.11]) by funky.danky.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id MAA24932 for <danello at danky.com>; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 12:35:54 -0400 Received: from hawk.freenetproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F33255818D; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:17:07 -0700 (PDT) Delivered-To: devl at freenetproject.org Received: from k-vort2.zd.guj.de (fwhide.guj.de [193.7.250.35]) by hawk.freenetproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E999158184 for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:16:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hermes.guj.de (hermes.zd.guj.de [193.7.241.37]) by k-vort2.zd.guj.de (8.11.3/guj-zz-1.4) with ESMTP id f3JGAUV03594 for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 16:10:30 GMT Received: from drjava.de ([192.168.176.135]) by hermes.guj.de (8.9.1b+Sun/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA10521 for <devl at freenetproject.org>; Thu, 19 Apr 2001 18:10:29 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <3ADF0FC1.CAB29EAD at drjava.de> From: Stefan Reich <[email protected]> X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: devl at freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] Crisis - Freenet Reliability and Performance References: <002a01c0c8bc$af7f0d40$eb7436d2 at private> <20010419165331.B1209 at hobbex.localdomain> <004701c0c8e7$ab889730$cbe636d2 at private> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: devl-admin at freenetproject.org Errors-To: devl-admin at freenetproject.org X-BeenThere: devl at freenetproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.3 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org List-Help: <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=help> List-Post: <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl>, <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=subscribe> List-Id: Discussion of information related to Freenet development <devl.freenetproject.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl>, <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/> Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 18:18:09 +0200 X-Mozilla-Status: 8011 X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000 X-UIDL: 3adbdd6c000000f5 Status: RO Content-Length: 1721 Lines: 40 What I'm wondering in this context is... how can we be sure that Freenet isn't fragmented? A few months ago, Gnutella suffered from fragmentation so badly that it was virtually unusable. The main problem was de-facto fragmentation caused by nodes with way too little bandwidth. For Gnutella, it only got better since 2nd generation clients kill connections to slow hosts (and immediately connect to other hosts). But still, I would assume Gnutella consists of at least a handful fragments at any given point in time. With Freenet the situation is worse because its goals are more ambitious (basically, any file should be requestable from anywhere). Since you're always inserting into just one fragment, files won't be visible on other fragments unless -the files are requested at many different places AND
