On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 06:49:38AM +0000, Thomas Bruderer wrote: > I always suspect things which seem to others so obvious... > > There seems to be the missleading concept that inserts have to be slower than > downloads. The argument is: it needs to go over more hops therefore it is > slower. I have discussed this issue, and I think its obvious that this is not > true... > > Yes the latency is much bigger than with a download, but that doesnt mean we > can > transfer less blocks in the same time.
You are only considering the local cost. Because an insert visits 20 nodes instead of 7, it will hit 3 times as many nodes. This does not just affect latency! It affects throughput, for the simple reason that an insert causes 3 times as much load on the network. Therefore we can only send 1/3rd as many inserts as requests. That is not to say that there haven't been problems with load balancing and inserts... -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060421/df1f7fff/attachment.pgp>
