Re: [Help-gnunet] INDIRECTION_TABLE_SIZE and download speed

[Tracy R Reed]

On Fri, Sep 06, 2002 at 10:32:11AM -0400, James Blackwell spake thusly:
> I can't help but wonder if by coincidence you are pulling from me. I did
> a large insertion of a few thousand of what we could probably best call
> "popular daa". At the same time though, I have the following limits set:
> 
> MAXNETUPBPSTOTAL = 15000
> MAXNETDOWNPSTOTAL = 30000

Hey James! Small world.

Why bother setting such limits? Once the popular file is cached off your
machine (shouldn't take long) the bandwidth useage will subside. 

> I can't help but wonder if this isn't an achilles heel for all p2p
> systems? 

Probably. At least until GNUnet gets big enough to actually cache popular
stuff.

> The problem is that until things get out from the initial serving place
> and cached, there is a huge bottleneck.

The sooner you can get the files cached the sooner the bottleneck goes
away. It seems like rather than limiting bandwidth it would be a better
idea to limit the number of simultaneous downloads.

> Basically, the idea is to throttle how many of these "new to gnunet"
> files can go out at once so that we don't clog so badly that nobody gets
> anything new.

Exactly. 

I started downloading half a dozen files and they are all down to an
average of around 100bps now. I still get a new block every now and then
so the machine must still be online. I don't know why it has gotten so
slow.

-- 
Tracy Reed      http://www.ultraviolet.org

pgpkKzotL8Qg3.pgp
Description: PGP signature