You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi Dominic, first of all thank you for the amazing library, which we successfully could integrate to our project, using streams on webrtc.
We are trying to implement a system where every browser becomes a node, eg. 1000 browsers, every 10 of them become a cluster, every peer in the cluster holds the same data (1/100th of the total), thus 100 clusters contain the full dataset. This is a network of browsers, therefore, each of them can appear/disappear at random (this example assumes not all 10 at the same cluster would disappear at once). We want to make sure when a browser joins the network, it holds only 100th of the dataset (numbers are figurative) so that they don't have to download/keep a lot of data. Peers in the cluster replicate, clusters will do the sharding.
Maybe a consistent hashring is the way to go, maybe finger table, I was wondering if you have given this a thought, if so, what would you advise?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
yes, that is how i would do it. read the dynamo paper, it describes that architecture in detail - it's also essentially how bit torrent works from a big picture perspective
Hi Dominic, first of all thank you for the amazing library, which we successfully could integrate to our project, using streams on webrtc.
We are trying to implement a system where every browser becomes a node, eg. 1000 browsers, every 10 of them become a cluster, every peer in the cluster holds the same data (1/100th of the total), thus 100 clusters contain the full dataset. This is a network of browsers, therefore, each of them can appear/disappear at random (this example assumes not all 10 at the same cluster would disappear at once). We want to make sure when a browser joins the network, it holds only 100th of the dataset (numbers are figurative) so that they don't have to download/keep a lot of data. Peers in the cluster replicate, clusters will do the sharding.
Maybe a consistent hashring is the way to go, maybe finger table, I was wondering if you have given this a thought, if so, what would you advise?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: