On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 4:17 AM, Roger Dingledine <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 10:02:30AM +0200, Daniel Martí wrote: >> * Regarding their size, #140 suggests that they are not useful past 16 >> hours. I thought we could compare the compressed size of the diffs >> when creating them, since they may be of use for a longer time. We >> could do this relative size limit first as well as the time limit >> mentioned above. >> >> That is all that we came up with for now, what do you think? Ideas about >> what might be missing or needing an update are welcome, of course :) > > Hypothesis: a good chunk of the new lines are lines that you've already > seen in some recent consensus. That is, they're relays that lost the > Running flag but now they have it again. > > Step zero, see to what extent this theory is true in practice. > > If it's true a lot, is there something clients can do to take advantage > of this fact? Like, keep several recent consensuses so they already have > the lines they're told to add back in? Or do the numbers work out poorly > here, since the bytes we spend saying "yes, those lines from back then, > the ones that hash to H" eat too much into our savings to warrant the > extra complexity?
One alternative in this case would be to include non-running relays in the consensus. This would make each individual consensus longer, but (if your guess is right) might make compressed diffs shorter. -- Nick _______________________________________________ tor-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-dev
