[tahoe-dev] [tahoe-lafs] #778: "shares of happiness" is the wrong measure; "servers of happiness" is better

[tahoe-lafs]

#778: "shares of happiness" is the wrong measure; "servers of happiness" is
better
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------
 Reporter:  zooko               |           Owner:           
     Type:  defect              |          Status:  new      
 Priority:  critical            |       Milestone:  undecided
Component:  code-peerselection  |         Version:  1.4.1    
 Keywords:  reliability         |   Launchpad_bug:           
--------------------------------+-------------------------------------------

Comment(by davidsarah):

 Replying to [comment:21 swillden]:
 > Perhaps it would be better to measure happiness by "number of servers
 that can fail without losing the file"?  I think that makes the
 implications of setting the parameter much easier for users to understand,
 and it's not complicated for Tahoe to compute:  Just generate the peer
 list, assign share counts to the peers, sort by share count (ascending),
 and sum up the list until {{{total >= k}}}.  The number of remaining,
 unsummed, servers is the maximum that can be lost without losing the file.

 This sounds like the right thing to me.

-- 
Ticket URL: <http://allmydata.org/trac/tahoe/ticket/778#comment:24>
tahoe-lafs <http://allmydata.org>
secure decentralized file storage grid