gnu-arch-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[Gnu-arch-users] Re: RFC: arch protocol, smart server, and tla implement


From: Chris Gray
Subject: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: RFC: arch protocol, smart server, and tla implementation prototypes
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2004 15:48:31 -0800
User-agent: Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.2 (gnu/linux)

On 5 Feb 2004, Tom Lord wrote:
> Not necessarily.  The protocol we've been discussing doesn't require
> the server to create every delta it's asked for.  It can instead
> reply with a list of deltas that add up to what it was asked for.
>
> A server could therefore reasonably decide to, for example:

I guess I'm making the transition from "dumb" server to "really really
smart" server more slowly than you.  

> ~ <countless other variations>
>
> Such policies are ample to prevent, let's call them, accidental DoS
> attacks where a popular server just thrashes wildly under an
> idiosyncratic pattern of fair requests.   (And that property puts as
> ahead of certain other protocols!)

I'll take your word for it.  

> Yeah, but you made up a stupid server implementation that would have
> n^2 behavior and you're trying to use that to argue against the
> protocols and architecture that would fail to prevent you from
> implementing such a stupid server.  Can I have some more of that,
> but pickled and on a cracker, please?

Oh, because it's a red herring.  It's funny because it's a cliche.
Well as soon as you can fill my pudding bowl with this server that
knows when to cache things, I'll accept that as proof.  

I guess I blundered when I brought up the DoS attack though.  That
sort of obscured my original message.  My message was that skiplists
are a data structure that you should consider for reasons of
efficiency, simplicity, and size.  I feel they would be preferable to
what we have now and easier to implement than a truly smart server.

Cheers,
Chris





reply via email to

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