Idea: The 10000 user experiment
Moderator: Moderators
Idea: The 10000 user experiment
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...
-
- Posts: 506
- Joined: 2003-01-03 07:33
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.
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.
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.
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.Qbert wrote:I think a more pertinent question
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.
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.
-
- DC++ Contributor
- Posts: 3212
- Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
- Location: .pa.us
If you over-saturate your connection, users will drop. It's not a matter of "putting up with lag."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?
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.
-
- DC++ Contributor
- Posts: 3212
- Joined: 2003-01-07 21:46
- Location: .pa.us
Oops, perhaps I should've said do the correct math. ** is exponentiation.
(10000/20)**2 = 250,000 kbit/s
I found the original chat:
Verliba is the author of Verlihub, which seems to have pioneer the recent large-user trend.
(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
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.
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.
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.cologic wrote:You're wrong.
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.
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.
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.cologic wrote:Even within computer math, virtually none of the C-based languages use ^ to signify exponentiation
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.
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.
So .. when it refers to programming languages, which you already discounted as authoritative sources of mathematical notation. Right then.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
How about a published mathematics textbook when it's referring to the math, and not trying to translate it to calculators' notations?
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.
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.
I surf on an OC3 without limitations, two to be exact, and I'm not joking.