Re: LIFO simulations
toad <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.technical |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Dec 13, 2006 at 08:43:42PM +0000, Michael Rogers wrote: > toad wrote: > > I don't understand. Why is LIFO better? > > I don't understand either - maybe because it favours new messages, which > are less likely to be redundant copies of messages that have already > reached their destinations? If that's true, it might also have lower > latency... > > > Are you allowing *ALL* requests > > to complete before reporting the result? > > No, I'm taking a slice of the simulation in its steady state and > counting the number of messages sent and received in that slice. If it is actually a steady state - is it? > > Cheers, > Michael _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech
signature.asc
(application/pgp-signature, 189 B)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFgLbgA9rUluQ9pFARAklFAJ9h33tQGlUZYj3h88lcNKzy8pYvpQCeO5uU FLqibM+bO0LxFb+Zv0yAlt4= =9qqF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----