Re: [Sks-devel] How many is too many?

[Ari Trachtenberg]

There should not be any significant hit in having more peers (within reason), 
as you will
waste relatively few resources syncing with peers that have more or less the
same keys.   On the other hand, having more peers should mean that you spend 
less
time per individual sync and that your data will be more up-to-date.

best,
        -Ari

On Jan 24, 2012, at 2:53 PM, Robert J. Hansen wrote:

> On 1/24/12 2:13 PM, Javier Henderson wrote:
>> At what point (if any) is adding more peers to a given keyserver detrimental?
> 
> Impossible to say.  There's a theorem in mathematics that makes it clear
> two peers are sufficient for performance, and the more the merrier -- up
> until the point your line gets saturated.  So this is really a question
> of your bandwidth, and not a question that has a clear answer.
> 
> (The Grocery Line Theorem: if everyone approaching the checkout lines at
> a grocery store looks at two lines and moves to join the shorter of the
> two, all lines will, to a very high probability, maintain an equal
> length.  With a little work it can be made to apply to keyservers.  If
> everyone were to pick just two peers to sync up with, and synced with
> the server holding the fewer keys, all servers would sync quickly and
> remain in sync.)
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sks-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/sks-devel

--
Ari Trachtenberg                   Assoc. Prof., Assoc. Grad. coChair, ECE
address@hidden                    http://people.bu.edu/trachten