vinyl1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Every time we download a new release, > we hope this will be the one and all the content will zip to our machines with > lightening speed.
Ok, forgive me if this has been discussed before (and please point me to this discussion), but I've been wondering what are realistic expectations of speed? There is a set of nodes, hoepfully well connected, but all with finite bandwidth connections. There is some data I'd likem to retrieve, located (hopefully) at one or more nodes in a set of finite sized datastores. It seems NG Routing was introduced to help mediate what I'd over-simplify as people trying to pull out more than they put in. So this prompts my borader question: we're pooling bandwidth and data storage in a large, cryptographically securish network. We're expecting a certain performance from that network. What sort of speed do we expect from that network? If the collective data stores are too small, and the collective bandwidths too limited, then won't we see limited transfers? (Forgive me if this states the obvious). Are we not seeing lightening speeds simply because Freenet as a whole is underresourced. That maybe this is as good as it gets without more nodes with more resources? Has anyone done any modelling? Any ideas? Any comments? What is a reasonable expectation of Freenet performance right now? Any way to tell? Lower or upper bounds? I for one am very happy with what Freenet delivers and see it getting better steadily albeit with occasional missteps. But my expectations may be unreasonably low. I request information and shortly thereafter it arrives (or often immediately) and in what I'm lead to believe is a relative anonymous way. I like it. _______________________________________________ Support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
