On Wed, Apr 19, 2006 at 06:49:38AM +0000, Thomas Bruderer wrote:
> I always suspect things which seem to others so obvious...
>
> There seems to be the missleading concept that inserts have to be slower than
> downloads. The argument is: it needs to go over more hops therefore it is
> slower. I have discussed this issue, and I think its obvious that this is not
> true...
>
> Yes the latency is much bigger than with a download, but that doesnt mean we can
> transfer less blocks in the same time.
You are only considering the local cost. Because an insert visits 20
nodes instead of 7, it will hit 3 times as many nodes. This does not
just affect latency! It affects throughput, for the simple reason that
an insert causes 3 times as much load on the network. Therefore we can
only send 1/3rd as many inserts as requests.
That is not to say that there haven't been problems with load balancing
and inserts...
--
Matthew J Toseland - toad@???
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
