On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 02:53:07PM +1200, David McNab wrote: > Seriously though - I'll have a look, but I'm a bit sceptical about the > feasibility ot getting the required speed in a Java FProxy implementation. > Maybe some hard-assed coding decisions might result in being able to stream > MP3s (on a fine day, with the tongue angled 15 degress upward out the left > of the mouth, and no other processes running), but then again, maybe not. As > for MPEG streaming, I don't hold much hope.
Where are you getting the idea that whatever observed slowness is due to fproxy being written in Java? My suspects are 1) slow network and 2) the fact that currently fproxy, even though it runs in the node, makes an FNP connection to the node to do requests. > Again, I propose, what do people think of a portable C (yeh - straight C) > FProxy implementation? Competition is always good. But I don't think the speed boost you're assuming you'll obtain is really there.. -- # tavin cole # # "Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that # man doesn't have to experience it." # # - Max Frisch _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
