On May 23, 2003 07:15 am, Toad wrote: > On Thu, May 22, 2003 at 11:13:23PM -0700, Tracy R Reed wrote: > > On Wed, May 21, 2003 at 11:25:01AM -0700, Ian Clarke spake thusly: > > > > I have friends who are really into bittorrent. bittorrent does not > > > > have the problem of data falling out of the network so easily (ie. > > > > much more reliable) > > > > > > This simply isn't true - you can only get data in BitTorrent from > > > people who have specifically downloaded the thing you are looking for > > > and who leave their client running - Freenet spreads content beyond > > > those that are specifically downloading it meaning that data's > > > longevity is likely to be much better with Freenet. > > > > I think it is true that it is more reliable and data doesn't fall out. > > And for the very reason you stated: You get the data from people who have > > downloaded the content. I am currently having MUCH more trouble > > retrieving things with freenet than with bittorrent. > > > > > No, but you do need to deal with Python, and I haven't heard too many > > > reports of trouble from people that can't get Java installed in a while > > > now. > > > > Python came pre-installed on my system and there are no python-vm quirks > > or incompatibilities that I am aware of. > > > > > I have yet to see clear evidence of this and my personal experience is > > > that the two are very similar in-terms of speed. I wish someone would > > > do a direct comparison. > > > > They used to be fairly close if you had the memory and cpu power to run a > > lot of download threads. Lately freenet has become a dog for splitfiles. > > 60 download threads to get 90k/s with freenet makes most other tasks on > > my dual 500Mhz PIII with 512M of RAM a bit difficult. Bittorrent can > > download at that speed using far less memory and cpu. I would do a direct > > comparison but an insert of a test file of any size would take forever. > > > > > That is strange, I have had no such problems. I think one issue is > > > that some download clients (such as Fuqid) default to a 5% heal > > > percentage, I believe this should be 100% by default. > > > > I have tried to get files varying from 30M to a couple hundred meg lately > > with little luck. I did have success on one of three such files last > > night. > > I have downloaded two very large splitfiles on a two week old node, the > first time, the other node which is slightly younger seems to be doing okay > with a third splitfile.
Then you are lucky. I have been able to get _one_ large splitfile in about twenty tries. Ed Tomlinson _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
