p2p = Just one big, great redundant SAN? (9)

1 Name: Anonymous 2004-11-23 15:49 ID:Heaven [Del]

As I sit here on Share leeching large hordes of anime and doujinishi I am thinking to myself just how much net traffic, disk space, time, money and effort goes into file sharing, let alone how redundant the layout of a lot of setups are.

Now say for instance you have a disk failure. ~80Gb of whatever you kept stashed on there. p2p can just very well fill it back up again; and even restore 100% of the data that was originally on the drive before its death. I'm implying that p2p is like a large, public distrobuted network RAID. Think GoogleFS style, where tonnes of machines with their own redudant measures are storing multiple copies of data, only to be fetched, moved, backedup, rebuilt from parity and so on.

For an experiment I would like to encrypt, compress, and distrobute some files. They dont have to be anything important: for the sake of the experiment its better that they are not. Documents, Images and maybe an mp3 or too might go in the pile. This could also work out to be a redundant time capsule, I could give out the private keys and passphrases to it all in a couple of years when computers have evolved even further. BT, eDonkey, Share, Winny, Fastrack, Gnutella (and Gnutella2) etc etc.

Your storage space, is my storage space.

Discuss.

2 Name: hk0!0khonVgaHI 2004-11-23 16:48 ID:mGncsM1g [Del]

Take one part coda, one part pvfs2, one part gfs, one part freenet, on part waste, mix, serve.

3 Name: Anonymous 2004-11-23 18:50 ID:0getfPjg [Del]

On caching networks like Share or Freenet, a sealed file just sitting around isn't going to be very popular, and will not propagate much. You'd be better off putting it on some website and waiting for the internet archive to... archive it.

4 Name: dmpk2k!hinhT6kz2E 2004-11-23 22:51 ID:r18hqAMQ [Del]

I think retreival will be the main problem. You certainly can dump all your files on a p2p network, but you'll need a reliable way of knowing which files on a p2p network were originally yours.

If it were possible to search by hash it would remove one hurdle. The second is >>3.

5 Name: Anonymous 2004-11-23 23:38 ID:Heaven [Del]

>tonnes
>mp3 or too
>distrobute

lol spelling

6 Name: Albright!LC/IWhc3yc 2004-11-24 04:22 ID:CquryGWg [Del]

"Tonnes" is actually correct in the Queen's English. "Too" for "two," however, is a capital offense against the English language worldwide.

>>3 and >>4 have good points. Unless you name your files "ZOmG UNDERAGE LESBIANS STRIP AND HAVE ANAL SEX BOOBS TITS FUCK AND SUCK.avi," your files aren't going to propagate very far...

7 Name: Anonymous 2004-11-24 09:37 ID:Heaven [Del]

>>5 is DQN

8 Name: dmpk2k!hinhT6kz2E 2004-11-25 23:48 ID:gj0lQkFw [Del]

At the risk of sounding like an airhead, who was DQN originally anyway? Some spammer in 4chan's /dis/?

9 Name: Anonymous 2004-11-26 02:07 ID:Heaven [Del]

This thread has been closed. You cannot post in this thread any longer.