Re: [9front] cfs, aan and network recommendations

[hiro <23hiro@gmail.com>]

yeah, but just like steve simon said, it seems at least in relation
it's much better suited for coping with bandwidth limitations than
high latency...

i.e. it probably would have made sense on some local serial connection
or dialup in the same city...

comparatively it's useless for the internet with those much higher
latencies, and bandwidth has suddenly become quite big, so "why waste
local space" (says the cloud fanboy... not completely without reason).

of course it's more complex than i make it sound, there are still
scenarios where saving bandwidth makes sense. it's just that they are
less, and often this doesn't reduce the end-user waiting times any
more, while formerly it did.

On 11/17/21, sirjofri <sirjofri+ml-9front@sirjofri.de> wrote:
> Hiro,
>
> I didn't receive your mail to this address, only to my other address
> (whatever's going wrong with the mailing list).
>
> Readahead or not, transferring gigabytes of data or not is here the
> question. If the version is the same and I don't need to download the
> data cfs gives me the cached file from the local disk.
>
> In theory. I have no measured times and stuff like that.
>
> sirjofri
>