Mas73 Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Hello,I have an issue with the way I thought computers were going to contribute to the swarm. I have one folder containing about 350 gigs on my server that I am sharing for more than 40 days read-only with 7 peers located all over the world, it's a big video community project and several video editors are working on it. The first of them having joined the swarm already have several gigs on their sides. I thought as the swarm would build up, all the computers would contribute to the overall upload-download and system resiliency. Two days ago the server was shut down for maintenance, I thought "no problem, all the peers keep contributing between them and the latest arrived will keep seeing files downloading, this should be transparent for them". Turns out they contacted me to tell me my server is offline they aren't downloading anymore (they need the files to do their work). Did I miss something with the way the system is working? I gave all of them the same read-only secret requesting approval and sent by email directly from BT sync, so I didn't fiddle with the secret to change its properties. They were all approved from the server and everything was working fine with the server online.Thanks,Mas73. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mintwurm Posted February 3, 2015 Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 You gave them all read-only keys ?Then how were they contributing in the first place ? The way I understand it, every peer in the network will contribute to distribute updates on the folders. But only peers with read/write can actually change the content of the folders, the others will only see the changes done by these few. If all of the peers in your network only have permissions to read, then the only version that could ever be updated lies on the main server. By shutting down the server you effectively froze the state of the system since no-one may change anything. Surely some of them are allowed to write ? Otherwise I can't imagine how you collaborated on the project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mas73 Posted February 3, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2015 Hi, when I say "contribute", it means contribute to the swarm by uploading to other peers, not contribute to the project. They need only have access to the files, not edit them. I have just tried again with a peer as I had all but one peer connected. I shut down the server for a while and transfers kept going. I just started the server again to see if it changes the speed for other peers. I don't understand what happened sooner. If they have RO keys only, it shouldn't change anything to the fact they contribute to the swarm in upload-download?Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 That is not how it works when you have peers that are read only.They only can be served with data by read-write instances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mas73 Posted February 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Ouch, that's a big blow in the face for my project. It's also defying the entire torrenting principle. I mean, when I use uTorrent, if the peer who has posted the original file goes offline, I keep downloading/uploading with other peers don't I? So RO peers don't "contribute" to the swarm, they only receive files. A bit useless to use BTsync then, any file server will do. Same for encrypted read-only then, there is no point sending encrypted keys.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mas73 Posted February 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 The way I read it in the user manual and it's just been confirmed on another thread, is that all peers do contribute to the distributed network by uploading back files, whether they have RO, RW or even encrypted-RO keys.Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreatMarko Posted February 5, 2015 Report Share Posted February 5, 2015 Moe is incorrect - If you have 3 connected nodes, one being R/W (let's call it "A") and the other two R/O ("B" and "C"), then the following should happen:B and C will receive data/changes from A.B and C can also share received data between themselves.Changes made on B or C will not propagate to other devices Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moe Posted February 6, 2015 Report Share Posted February 6, 2015 Moe is incorrect - If you have 3 connected nodes, one being R/W (let's call it "A") and the other two R/O ("B" and "C"), then the following should happen:B and C will receive data/changes from A.B and C can also share received data between themselves.Changes made on B or C will not propagate to other devices Wow! Sorry! I had no idea.. huh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.