[bittorrent] Introductory/endgame algorithms

Olaf van der Spek olafvdspek at gmail.com
Wed Sep 28 07:23:39 EDT 2005

On 9/28/05, Jari Sundell <sundell.software at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/27/05, Elliott Mitchell <ehem at m5p.com> wrote:
> >
> > You get major perform damage if you keep 100 peers alive. The number of
> > HAVE messages is directly related to the number of peers. At 30 peers the
> > HAVE messages account for 50% of the BitTorrent protocol overhead, or 1%
> > of the payload size. At 100 peers, HAVE messages are accounting for 75%
> > of the overhead, 3% of the size of the payload.
> >
> > Though 3% isn't a huge percentage, considering the size that payloads
> > run, 3% is likely to be several megabytes. Do you see a reason that
> > justifies an additional 2% overhead?
> >
> Some of us have bandwidth enough to actually need more than 100 peers,
> having written clients that regularly upload to hundreds of peers at speeds
> up to 50MB/s. I never manage to saturate my bandwidth, and if the torrent

Is that bit or byte?
And just wondering, what kind of storage solution is being used that
can handle that kind of (random) IO?

More information about the BitTorrent mailing list