Auto-requeries!
 

It seems that auto-requeries are not so easy to handle as Vinnie thought:

http://www.bearshare.net/forum/showt...threadid=12772

But he was able to badmouth Phex and Xolox, because they are unhealthy for the Gnutella net, he wanted to block them!

Should we now block bearshare too? :)

Morgwen

Well, that's one of the reasons for Bearshare 3.0 is still alpha. What do you expect? At least it was not intended that way.

No taliban troll, the funny part is that Vinnie was badmouthing and blocking others for something he does even worse now. Well, now that he understand the importance of requeries as a key technology (and he fix his problems), we might see him cooperate with his hated Xolox in a few years. :)

Yes A "PUBLIC" alpha... so if he test this alpha in the public he "IS HURTING" the Gnet.

He shouldn´t release it for public tests until he can be sure that he is doing a better job than the other clients he was badmouthing for months!

Morgwen

Well, Morgwen, that's your opinion, - and it's also your problem.

Nope its not my problem...

it hurts the Gnet... I don´t know where YOUR problem is, you change your mind every day... I remember you was one of the people who were crying Xolox is bad for the Gnet, and bearshare isn´t?

Hmm...

funny they do the same!

Mr. two face.

Morgwen

OOH! Slanderous!

"Mr. two face"

Close this thread! Quick! Someone said something bad!
Where is cultiv8r when we need him?

Why, you're going to sue? :D

Kids today... Wait a second your 29!!! Try acting like it.

You want to complain about others badmouthing but then you badmouth others yourself in the process.. I think you should aplogize.

I don´t know how often you follow the forums here... I know Taliban and his "opinions" very well and so I am NOT going to apologize!

And for what I should apologize? Is two face a flame??? :confused:

Morgwen

Yes, it is public alpha. But the alpha has a ten day expiration date, and it will refuse to work after that time. And there is also very small number of people using that alpha. We really can't say that it is hurting the network if there is only a few users using that client.



And back to the original issue. If you have read that thread to the end, you would notice that there is a solution for it already, even if the new alpha haven't been released yet. The problem was that the requery interval was set to zero. And because there was no other users complaining about that, the default value was correct with most users (for some reason I had the wrong value). So, actually I was the only user flooding the network with BearShare.

Everybody who change this value is flooding the Gnet, such an option should not be changegable...

Only some users use this alpha? Everybody is able to download it so how do you know how many people are using this alpha?

You should test the alpha in private... like other do too!

Morgwen

P.S.:

The solution was posted after I created this thread here, check the dates!

I'm pretty sure that it will not be changeable in the release version. If it is fixed in next alpha, after the present alpha is expired there are no user flooding the network.

Run any client what is capaple to show what make of host it is connected to. It will be quite a hard work to find a BearShare 3.0.0.aXX user. Or search something, it won't be that easier to find 3.0.0.axx users in that way either.

Releasing the alpha in public gives you a lot of comments from users. Bugs are found much faster than in closed and limited testing enviroments. And because all alphas cam be used only a limited amoun of time, the possible harmful alpha version will not continue harming the network too long.

And it gives a good feeling to the most active users, they can take part to the developing process.

That was my mistake. I'm sorry about that.

someone said: "You should test the alpha in private... like other do too!"

If the alpha were not public then how would this bug have been discovered? There is a difference between INTENTIONALLY requerying at short intervals and a BUG. Luckily, the bug was caught before 3.0 went final, so it does not cause harm to the gnutella network at a large scale. XoloX and friends didn't care about the effects their aggressive re-querying behaviour would have (Don't even try to say that XoloX wouldn't/hasn't harm the the gnutella network. You just said that BearShare would harm the network with agressive requerying). XoloX dont even have public betas.

wrong, look into the xolox forum

To be correct Xolox never released a "final" version AFAIK...

but you can test betas in public (they tested it for some weeks in private now) but not alphas!

Morgwen

Of course now, if Vinnie would label 3.0 aka Defender a beta...

The difference is Xolox tested in private for some weeks, bearshare not!

Normally alphas are versions which are for non-public tests and betas for the public... normally...

Morgwen

Morgwen, do you have possibly something agains the way how BearShare is testing the betas in public? I think there is nothing wrong with the way how BearShare is doing it (ten day expiration date in each beta, new betas out almost daily). It is the best way to get feedback from wide userbase and it helps you to find bugs quickly.

Sure its the best way to find bugs quikly, but while you search for them you might hurt the net...

So the normal process is first to test the version in private (a few users) until you can say the big bugs are found and then release a "public" beta!

Limewire and the others do the it this way...

Morgwen

You seem to be very concerned about alphas hurting the net. But I think the guys in BearShare labs know about the risk. That is why the alpha has the expiration date, and the alpha is announced only in BearShare labs forum. That is the only place where can be found the link to the alphas (only one that I know). So, there is not that big userbase with the alphas.

And I'm also pretty sure that they have tested the alpha in pirvately very long before releasing it public. The first public alpha version number was 35, so there was least that many private releases before the public version. That means months of testing and developing.

There are also numerious of different "Final release" clients which are much more harmful to the network, mostly because the higher number of users. That would be eliminated if the users upgrade their client to the recent version, or move to other client which is under active development.


That is they have chosen. The way BearShare staff have chosen is different, and they have done a lot to minize the risks that they may cause.

Wait the numer 35 says nothing, it means only they discovered some bugs and changed some features not how long they tested it. I read Vinnies comment as he relaesed this alpha, he said somethinglike is "very" unstable...

A tested version is not very unstable, it might have bugs but not should be stable enough to release it.

About this 10 days expiration, you can hurt the net ten days... sure its not as much as other do with a final release but its could hurt the net too... and I think this is what the people should avoid.

There are several ways to hurt the net and I think its funny that a developer who is crying that other hurt the net is doing the same...

But this is a point of view, and remember I didn´say that the alpha hurt I said it could hurt as you proved in your post on bearshare.net...

Morgwen

That is right. That warning note was on the alpha announcement page. I found the first alphas hard to use (mostly becasue all of the missing features) so that I didn't even try to use it as my primary client.

Well, I guess it was stable enough because it got released.. And the users have got warned about the bugs.

I agree.

Well, least he didn't do it intentionally. Everyone makes mistakes.



And by the way, it is no more an alpha, it is beta now. And a damn good one, I can't wait the final release!