Hi...

I would suggest you share less files. I doubt they are all really of high demand...

Gregor

Oh yeah - and Phex too... GregorK just reminded me of that.

I wonder if mutella would handle that... Never had that much files around to test :-)) I guess 'library' command will be slow and inefficient...

Anyways, it make most sense to share exactly RARE content, because the net is full with the common stuff anyways. 99% of my gnutella use for example I am looking for some rare tracks and movies.

Go on Bobo, keep your stuff out and I'd delete upload leaders because this stops people that are looking for rare stuff from getting your files :-))

--Max

I never tried to share 50,000 files with LimeWire but I can imagine that it would take at least 50MB just to share them, - a lot more if they are mp3s since LimeWire would try to read their mp3 tags. LimeWire really hasn't been designed to share that many files (although I think it will work, if your machine has enough RAM ).

gtk-gnutella's Raphael claims that his program is able to share 100k files and that he does so regularly to test it's limits. gtk-gnutella is certainly much faster than the bloated qtella (solid c versus c++/qt). - So I would try that.

As far as mutella is concerned - that damn thing will requery every every 60 seconds. So if you have 10,000 mutella peers with one running query as your network horizon , sending a ~ 60 bytes query every 60 seconds it amounts to about 10kbytes/s for each peer (not counting duplicate queries) just to forward those damn queries without even transmitting a single reply packet. In my opinion the developer deserves a good beating for that.

It's even worse than Xolox, although that really brings the network down because of its market share.

__________________
Morgens ess ich Cornflakes und abends ess ich Brot
Und wenn ich lang genug gelebt hab, dann sterb ich und bin tot

--Fischmob

Please vote here:

http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...threadid=22208

Morgwen