Re: [freenet.uservoice.com] New m essage: 'I have a fibre line as well as 10 TB of … '

Dennis Nezic <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.network.freenet.support
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 13:56:31 -0500, Dennis Nezic wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Mar 2011 11:16:40 -0600, no-reply-kmprC/[email protected] wrote:
> > I have a fibre line as well as 10 TB of sapce I can
> >  devote to freenet. Would be swell if I could devote 10TB rather
> > than the max of 300GB
> 
> I wonder if all of Freenet can fit in those 10TB :D. Or if the size of
> Freenet can be mathematically estimated from a few random node
> samples.

Handwaving, since nodes are supposed to specialize over a specific key
range, and assuming keys are equally distributed across the entire
key-space, perhaps your 3% datastore utilization is a result of a small
freenet. Ie. a node can only store (specialized-key-range-percentage *
sizeof-freenet) gigs of data. If that's the case, the only way to
increase your datastore would be to broaden your key-storing-range, but
I don't think that would help, since freenet routing currently requires
key specialization.

Further handwaving, I wonder if it would be such a bad idea to support
supernodes, with broader key specializations. For example, would it be
a bad thing for a node to store the entire freenet?
_______________________________________________
Support mailing list
[email protected]
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-request-RdDMkVZAZeuJnvDnx1genB2eb7JE58TQ@public.gmane.org?subject=unsubscribe
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.