Re: Have maps (was Merkle, URLs, etc)

>From: Joseph Ashwood <[email protected]>

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Justin Cormack" <[email protected]>
> Subject: [BitTorrent] Have maps (was Merkle, URLs, etc)
> 
> >> Binary Merkle Trees: Are heavily flawed, and the only suggestion made to 
> >> fix
> >> it was to send the grandchildren as well, which completely defeats the 
> >> point
> >> of the child nodes, making the child nodes pure overhead, they serve no
> >> purpose except to enlarge the tranfer and raise the CPU time.
> >
> > Apart from the performance issue (the nodes are very small and you almost
> > immediately need another one, what is the problem?
> 
> In my view there is no need for another problem. The binary trees create 
> pure bloat that serves no purpose except to provide for more bloat.

The majority seems to disagree with you and think binary Merkle trees
will work fine. There are certainly places where they are far from ideal,
but remember that a flat DB is also far from ideal in some places.

Your argument of computation time and size being too great for binary
Merkle trees has already been thoroughly ground into the dirt. Notably
the tree overhead is only small-order linear with the size of the
payload.

I agree that binary trees appear to be very much sub-optimal, but this
isn't a fatal flaw. Unless you can bring up some fresh new aspect of this
issue, would you please shut up about this issue?


-- 
(\___(\___(\______          --=> 8-) EHM <=--          ______/)___/)___/)
 \   (    |         [email protected] PGP 8881EF59         |    )   /
  \_  \   |  _____  -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O-   _____  |   /  _/
    \___\_|_/82 04 A1 3C C7 B1 37 2A*E3 6E 84 DA 97 4C 40 E6\_|_/___/




 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BitTorrent/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/