[tahoe-dev] weekly Tahoe dev call report: 2012-07-10

[David-Sarah Hopwood]

On 13/07/12 22:56, Brian Warner wrote:
> On 7/11/12 8:27 AM, Terrell Russell wrote:
> 
>> Leases are per-share? And not per file... so "#6, share deleted" is
>> still only 1 of N being deleted...
> 
> Right, leases are per-share. The idea was that rebalancing (which really
> wants to move share #6 from server A to server B) is being driven by a
> client who has the right (Accounting) to add share #6 to server A, but
> not the right to delete share #6 from server B. They *do* have the right
> to stop keeping 6-on-B alive, though, by cancelling their existing lease
> and not creating/renewing any others. If they're the only person
> interested in this file, 6-on-B can get GCed right away.
> 
> The hope is that multiple supporters of a shared file will all converge
> on the same rebalancing conclusions, and allow the
> should-be-deleted-but-our-authority-model-doesn't-make-that-easy share
> to just expire.

That's a good reason to rebalance shares to the preferred locations
based on the permuted list of servers. (Actually, it's sufficient if
the shares are in some permutation of those locations; they don't
necessarily need to be in the right order for rebalancing to converge.)

-- 
David-Sarah Hopwood ⚥

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 554 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20120714/24be7d7f/attachment.pgp>