help-gnunet
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Help-gnunet] Not better since patch 0.4.6c :-(


From: Christian Grothoff
Subject: Re: [Help-gnunet] Not better since patch 0.4.6c :-(
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 12:56:25 -0500
User-agent: KMail/1.4.1

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Friday 06 September 2002 12:17 pm, Christian Drechsler wrote:
> ok, i have to add that i'm downloading a ~140MB file at the moment, so
> there is much traffic, anyway. but compare tcp-#QUERIES to udp-#3QUERIES.

What's unusual about that? If your gnunet-download sends one query, gnunetd
may decide to send it to multiple other nodes (and #3Queries will count each 
of these sends). Also, you may be routing queries from other nodes, so again 
an even higher number is not that unusual.

> i also have to add that this was a kill and start again; there's not
> always 7 hosts after 817 sec. normal here is 5-15 hosts, 19 being the
> highest i saw - same as christian grothoff.

Sounds right. 

> btw, i just patched from 0.4.6 to 0.4.6c. wow! *smile* ok, there are no
> longer any upstream values of 171 K. X-) now most of the time it's around
> 12 K of 16 K theoretical bandwidth. that's nice, i can even use the
> computer for other net stuff. ;-)

In fact, gnunetd should notice (!) that other apps are causing traffic and 
reduce its own volume accordingly. 

> those high values ... i think it's like network overclocking. ;-) it
> actually seems to have worked - but i certainly don't know if those udp
> packages ever reached their destination.
>
> anyway, the link became very
> unstable and reconnected every 20-40 minutes. so it's for sure better this
> way. and: the download speed is _way_ bigger now than it was before. i
> can't give sensible figures now as the download started with the old
> gnunetd and had big pauses (reconnects) in between. but it seems as if the
> speed is on an average of at least 4000 bps, maybe more. great! ;-)

Great news, so my fix to the requestmanager does work as I hoped it would (it 
was only tested for loopback-download...). Thanks for reporting. :-)


Christian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9eOxJ9tNtMeXQLkIRAq3tAKCa9U0a8Q7oMuBvqn5NRauMNoyKLwCdFNIk
DIjEhq3N6zRauagaHwfsyTo=
=y0Kh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]