Idea: The 10000 user experiment

Which hub software is the best? Where can I find script XXX? Discuss it here...(no, this is not for advertising your hub...)

Moderator: Moderators

Locked
guru3
Posts: 5
Joined: 2004-03-13 02:24
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Idea: The 10000 user experiment

Post by guru3 » 2004-03-13 02:29

Do as anyone think that it would be possible to get 10000 users in under 36h on one dc hub?
Well... We'll see how it goes...

ivulfusbar
Posts: 506
Joined: 2003-01-03 07:33

Post by ivulfusbar » 2004-03-13 02:58

people is not the problem, the problem is bandwidth which grows has squard growth.
Everyone is supposed to download from the hubs, - I don´t know why, but I never do anymore.

Qbert
Posts: 73
Joined: 2003-06-07 03:12

Post by Qbert » 2004-03-13 03:06

I think a more pertinent question is what is needed on the server and what hub software is best in order to sufficiently supply for 10,000 users.

Otherwise, theoretically I see nothing stopping it from happening.
My Visual Studio .NET 2003 is licensed under my name, and the same for my operating system... What about you?
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.

Qbert
Posts: 73
Joined: 2003-06-07 03:12

Post by Qbert » 2004-03-13 03:20

Qbert wrote:I think a more pertinent question
This was not meant in response to ivulfusbar's comment. My post simply had a connection problem and didn't get posted until many minutes after the previous comment.

Now I have timeouts. I'm glad I can isolate this to sourceforge, because otherwise I love my connection. I hope this doesn't get posted twice.
My Visual Studio .NET 2003 is licensed under my name, and the same for my operating system... What about you?
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.

guru3
Posts: 5
Joined: 2004-03-13 02:24
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by guru3 » 2004-03-13 10:24

So really ir comes down to bandwith. I better find out exactly how much I have. Ya' think users would possibly put up with a lot of lag to reach the 10,000 mark?
Well... We'll see how it goes...

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2004-03-13 13:00

guru3 wrote:So really ir comes down to bandwith. I better find out exactly how much I have. Ya' think users would possibly put up with a lot of lag to reach the 10,000 mark?
If you over-saturate your connection, users will drop. It's not a matter of "putting up with lag."

Code: Select all

<sandos> does anyone have the rough formula for hubtraffic for X users?
<ivulfusbar> there was (x/20)**2 kbps
<cologic> verliba's.
<ivulfusbar> since 2300-2600 is limit for 10Mbit.
So, for 10,000 users, you do the math.

guru3
Posts: 5
Joined: 2004-03-13 02:24
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by guru3 » 2004-03-13 16:47

Right, so 10000/20 = 500. 500*2 = 1000. 1000 what? kbps?
Well... We'll see how it goes...

GargoyleMT
DC++ Contributor
Posts: 3212
Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
Location: .pa.us

Post by GargoyleMT » 2004-03-13 17:08

Oops, perhaps I should've said do the correct math. ** is exponentiation.

(10000/20)**2 = 250,000 kbit/s

I found the original chat:

Code: Select all

[2003-08-26 08:14] <Verliba> << Got nice formula for you guys
[2003-08-26 08:16] <Verliba> << resp. U=(N/20)^2
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << no
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << 220
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << that's what formula gives
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << I tried myself and 220 was possible
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << 1-2s lag
[2003-08-26 08:19] <Verliba> << stable
[2003-08-26 08:20] <Verliba> << I need verifications ;o)
[2003-08-26 08:20] <Verliba> << on czpro formula works too
[2003-08-26 08:21] <Verliba> << (6000/20)^2/1024 ~ 88mbps which is reality
[2003-08-26 08:22] <Verliba> << the upload is  in average 64 but lot's of time it goes to 92
[2003-08-26 08:26] <Verliba> << i put this to docs on sf.net
[2003-08-26 08:27] <Verliba> << later i'll try to make a table of users/cpu
[2003-08-26 08:27] <Verliba> << that isn't so easy to estimate
Verliba is the author of Verlihub, which seems to have pioneer the recent large-user trend.

guru3
Posts: 5
Joined: 2004-03-13 02:24
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by guru3 » 2004-03-14 01:50

Got it, but in standard math ^ is for exponents... (I see ^ and I think "to the power of...")
Well... We'll see how it goes...

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2004-03-14 08:49

You're wrong.

Even within computer math, virtually none of the C-based languages use ^ to signify exponentiation (they don't tend to have an operator for it). Mathematica appears to use it, as does BASIC. Fortran uses **.

It's "in standard math" not the exponentiation operator, either; I recall from no mathematical book I've read such a convention. Rather, they tend to use superscripts.

So, yeah, you're wrong.

Qbert
Posts: 73
Joined: 2003-06-07 03:12

Post by Qbert » 2004-03-14 09:57

cologic wrote:You're wrong.
I don't know. When I see published mathematics textbooks, especially when used in schools or universities, I think very reputable of them. And when they sometimes reference calculators, especially TI calculators, I've known them to give "^" as information on how to perform exponentiation. They don't only say it to explain how to use your calculator, but also for sample TI-BASIC programs they supply in the text or when explaining how you can use a CAS (not just TI) to solve a problem.

But besides all of that, I regard TI highly and reputable because I love to use my TI-89 and programming (assembly and flash) for it. When I see "Exponentiation ^" in their guidebooks, I put it in my mind as being official.
My Visual Studio .NET 2003 is licensed under my name, and the same for my operating system... What about you?
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.

Qbert
Posts: 73
Joined: 2003-06-07 03:12

Post by Qbert » 2004-03-14 10:04

cologic wrote:Even within computer math, virtually none of the C-based languages use ^ to signify exponentiation
Just because a programming language (specifically a C basic language) doesn't use a specific operator for mathematics, that doesn't mean it's not standard math. How about factorial !, which is standard math.
My Visual Studio .NET 2003 is licensed under my name, and the same for my operating system... What about you?
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.

cologic
Programmer
Posts: 337
Joined: 2003-01-06 13:32
Contact:

Post by cologic » 2004-03-14 10:56

And when they sometimes reference calculators, especially TI calculators, I've known them to give "^" as information on how to perform exponentiation. They don't only say it to explain how to use your calculator, but also for sample TI-BASIC programs they supply in the text
So .. when it refers to programming languages, which you already discounted as authoritative sources of mathematical notation. Right then.

How about a published mathematics textbook when it's referring to the math, and not trying to translate it to calculators' notations?

guru3
Posts: 5
Joined: 2004-03-13 02:24
Location: Sweden
Contact:

Post by guru3 » 2004-03-14 11:53

I don't really care what the correct mathmatical notation, it's beside the point. I didn't understand what you meant, it has now been clarified, let it be.
Well... We'll see how it goes...

Qbert
Posts: 73
Joined: 2003-06-07 03:12

Post by Qbert » 2004-03-23 03:09

I just found this out in my Mathematica class, and was reminded of this thread. Just as you said ^ is used in Mathematica as power, it still also has a **. This could just add to the confusion that different areas use the same accepted symbol for different tasks.

NonCommutativeMultiply (**)
a ** b ** c is a general associative, but non‐commutative, form of multiplication.
My Visual Studio .NET 2003 is licensed under my name, and the same for my operating system... What about you?
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.

Locked