> Hi, > > It occurred to me that there might be some benefit to inserting freesites as > a single redundant splitfile containing an archive of the site. (Or two > archives - one for the static portion and one for today's insert).
I've suggested this before. The only thing is that viewing Freenet as a whole, it's better to make lots of requests (thus making nodes learn more about the network). From the point of view of an individual node operator, it's better to make fewer requests, thus making the whole process shorter for that specific set of requests. I think this is one area where we must find a balance between what is good for the network and what is good for an individual user. > > This could make both retreiving freesites more reliable due to the splitfile > redunancy and inserting freesites would work or fail atomically rather than > leaving a site half inserted on insert failure. > > Support for this would be fairly easy to add to fproxy - just a matter of > inventing a URI syntax for it I guess and having fproxy break files out of > the archive when requested. > > degs > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl > _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
