[freenet-dev] Why Freenet is so SLOW! Proposal for new load management

[Florent Daignière]

* Michael Rogers <m.rogers at cs.ucl.ac.uk> [2007-11-30 03:17:14]:

> Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > But the 
> > practical effect was reports from various places, not least on my own node, 
> > of the node using a lot more bandwidth and doing a lot more work than it 
> > would otherwise have done.
> 
> If the problem is just that nobody's node is reaching the bandwidth
> limit, would it be possible to tweak the various load thresholds
> (MAX_PING_TIME etc) until nodes seem to be using the configured amount
> of bandwidth?

I think that it's the way to go too.

> 
> > When a node has spare capacity in terms of the number of requests it can 
> > carry, it sends a message to this effect, inviting requests, to each of its 
> > peers. A node receiving such a message will normally send the queued request 
> > closest location-wise to the sender, although timing concerns may factor in 
> > also. Within a short period several requests will have been received, and the 
> > node will accept one and reject the others.
> 
> This sounds pretty similar to the current system - when a peer rejects a
> request we raise a flag and don't send it any more requests until the
> flag is lowered. But the flag is currently lowered by a timer, and
> you're saying it should be lowered by an explicit signal from the peer?
> That makes sense in principle, but whether it works in practice depends
> on whether nodes can estimate their capacity well enough to send the
> signal at the right time.

We could have both (timeout or peer said so).

NextGen$
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20071130/77bef6f2/attachment.pgp