That is interesting, but what would be even more interesting is understanding *why* this is...
Ian. On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 6:11 AM, Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > wrote: > On Wednesday 21 Sep 2011 20:58:44 Matthew Toseland wrote: > > From FMS: > > > > ExtraInsertsSingleBlock > > > > Sadao at JXXNvLaHdNMysx7GmY5~L4aCoMuQV85oJM9OIqhkTR8 wrote : > > > > > > 600 random files of size <32KB were inserted as CHK (compression=off, > > > metadata=on, 2 blocks in total) running build 1403 (NLM=on, AIMD=off) > > > and fetched 7 days later running build 1404. Here are the results: > > > > > > EISB Stuck files Stick ratio > > > 00 81/100 81% > > > 02 12/100 12% > > > 05 2/100 2% > > > 08 0/100 0% > > > 11 0/100 0% > > > 14 0/100 0% > > > > > > Maybe I should choose more small EISBs with lesser step between them, > > > i.e. EISB=0,1,2,3,4,5,6, and to repeat the test in build 1404, that is > > > definitely better than the previous one. But 12% stuck files with > > > EISB=02 (default Freenet setting) is too much in my opinion. > > > > Some really interesting new data showing that 2 extra-inserts works well > but is absolutely vital, and some analysis from me. > > Sadao at JXXNvLaHdNMysx7GmY5~L4aCoMuQV85oJM9OIqhkTR8 wrote : > > > I repeated the experiment on build 1404 with the same conditions but > > with different values of EISB. I inserted files on weekend and fetched > > them 10 days later on weekdays to see if that affects anything. I let > > the files to be fetched for about 8 hours and was changing their > > priority from time to time. Here are the results: > > > > EISB Stuck files Stuck ratio > > 00 38/100 38% > > 01 20/100 20% > > 02 4/100 4% > > 03 3/100 3% > > 04 1/100 1% > > 05 4/100 4% > > 06 1/100 1% > > > > I expected to see linear dependence but there is a jump between EISB=01 > > and EISB=02. It's strange for me. Anyway, EISB=02 is optimal for good > > freenet builds like 1404. But I still think that EISB=05 makes sense for > > poor builds like 1403. > > Now that's more like it! :) > > Thanks for the very encouraging statistics! > > Load management improvements should EVENTUALLY improve this further, > reducing the need for extra inserts: > - Smoother fair sharing in preemptive rejections. > - Sending the slow-down signal back to the AIMDs *before* we start > rejecting stuff. > - Possibly some queueing, provided we separate load management for SSKs > from that for CHKs first to decouple the feedback loops and therefore the > queueing times. > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > -- Ian Clarke Personal blog: http://blog.locut.us/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20111014/031e5f95/attachment.html>
