Le 15/10/2012 10:03, Tomasz Sterna a écrit :
Dnia 2012-10-15, pon o godzinie 02:22 +0200, Alexandre Jousset pisze:
We talked earlier about weighted randomization instead of
priorities. With weighted randomization it is impossible to be sure
that a local component will be preferred, this is why I made an
implicit priority for local components, still using weighted random
between local components, or between remote components when needed.
Right.
But I still don't see a rationale, why local components are better than
remote ones?
Why does local component should be preferred just because the connection
happened to come from local c2s?
Going to a remote component involves going through local router, then
through remote router, then remote component. It adds a hop + a (physical)
network access.
To do otherwise, we should use weighted random + priorities,
this would add more complexity and misunderstanding in the
configuration process.
I was thinking more of a binary switch "prefer local components", than
reintroducing priorities.
Ok.
--
-- \^/ --
-- -/ O \--------------------------------------- --
-- | |/ \| Alexandre (Midnite) Jousset | --
-- -|___|--------------------------------------- --
