Re: [ppsp] [Spam] 回复: Re:回复: Re: Proposal to resolve Issue 10 + 13

[Arno Bakker <[e-mail]>]

On 09/05/2012 08:19, Arno Bakker wrote:
> 
>> In such cases, requsting
>> a range of chunks needs no more bits than bin number. What's worse, if
>> the chunks peer A has is
>> sparsely distributed, i.e., the chunkmap is likely to be 10001011110,
>> bin numbering needs more bits.
> 
> Bins are actually more efficient than (start,end) in this example. With
> bin numbers, you'll in the worst case need an integer for every 1 in the
> bitmap, so 6 in this case. In a better case we might be able to address
> the 4 ones at the end as a single bin. However, if you use (start,end)
> addressing, you'll actually need 2 integers per 1 bit, or 12 integers.
> 

Correction: bins are equally or more efficient. It will take 3
(start,end) byte range pairs to represent 10001011110, so 6 ints. It
will take 3 to 6 bins to represent that, so 3-6 ints.

CU,
     Arno