Re: HAIL volunteer Rick Peralta

[Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org>]

Jeff Garzik wrote:
> Pete Zaitcev wrote:
>> In particular I'm
>> going to fight hard any talk of Chunk doing its own replication,
>> for now at least.
> 
> WRT chunkd and replication, yes, that's fine for version 1.0.
> 
> But consider which is more likely to have bandwidth to spare:
> 
>     a) client -> service
>         or
>     b) service -> service
> 
> Of the two, I'd say "a" is a bit more likely to be remote (WAN) and have 
> a slow-upload situation like my home cable modem (1 mbps down, 50 kbps 
> up), and "b" is more likely to be LAN.
> 
> Or to take converse logic -- is it likely that service->service 
> replication is SLOWER than client->service replication?
> 
> Every way I look at it, client->{service,service,service} replication 
> seems both easy... and potentially slower than alternatives :)

To elaborate a bit more...  there obviously are cases where you want the 
client to be the genesis of parallel data streams into the cloud.

My point was more that there are real world situations where multiple 
outgoing streams from the client is significantly slower than a single 
stream into the cloud, plus asking the cloud to perform further copies.

	Jeff