3 ms·

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised that IPFS's performance would be worse than FTP or any other protocol when it comes to transfers between two (or three) h

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised that IPFS's performance would be worse than FTP or any other protocol when it comes to transfers between two (or three) hosts. The benefits of distributes systems becomes bigger the larger the network. Replicate the same results with 100 nodes and we'll see. I still think torrents would be even more efficient though, than both FTP and IPFS.

skyfaller 5y ago
Isn't Hypercore (and its predecessor Dat), essentially Bittorrent + version control? https://hypercore-protocol.org/ https://hypercore-protocol.org/
chrisco255 5y ago
Is it possible to create an IPFS-based torrent network?
- georgyo 5y ago
  IPFS has very similar features as BitTorrent, you can remove torrent from that sentence and it would mean the same. You may be interested in BTFS, which is elements of IPFS but using BitTorrent as the protocol.
- somat 5y ago
  basically, if you don't look too hard, ipfs is bittorrent improved. The structures were cleaned up and given a shave, the trackers removed in favor of just putting everyone on the dht.
  - derefr 5y ago
    Bittorrent's trackerless Swarm protocol, and IPFS, both use Kademlia DHTs. So another way to look at it, is that every modern p2p protocol is just eMule :)
  - easrng 5y ago
    IPFS is BitTorrent v2 but somewhat older and worse
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
epr 5y ago
Not worse, worser
- kenny87 5y ago
  One certainly can't get much more worse than worser.
  - dpwm 5y ago
    "much worser", perhaps?
DeathArrow 5y ago
>The benefits of distributes systems becomes bigger the larger the network. Replicate the same results with 100 nodes and we'll see. That's true. I would be interested in an experiment to show how many IPFS host would be needed to reach parity to FTP and other protocols. I'm also wondering if IPFS can't be integrated in CDNs.

3 ms·

I'm not sure anyone would be surprised that IPFS's performance would be worse than FTP or any other protocol when it comes to transfers between two (or three) h

by chockchocschoir 5y ago

skyfaller 5y ago
Isn't Hypercore (and its predecessor Dat), essentially Bittorrent + version control? https://hypercore-protocol.org/ https://hypercore-protocol.org/
chrisco255 5y ago
Is it possible to create an IPFS-based torrent network?
- georgyo 5y ago
  IPFS has very similar features as BitTorrent, you can remove torrent from that sentence and it would mean the same. You may be interested in BTFS, which is elements of IPFS but using BitTorrent as the protocol.
- somat 5y ago
  basically, if you don't look too hard, ipfs is bittorrent improved. The structures were cleaned up and given a shave, the trackers removed in favor of just putting everyone on the dht.
  - derefr 5y ago
    Bittorrent's trackerless Swarm protocol, and IPFS, both use Kademlia DHTs. So another way to look at it, is that every modern p2p protocol is just eMule :)
  - easrng 5y ago
    IPFS is BitTorrent v2 but somewhat older and worse
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
epr 5y ago
Not worse, worser
- kenny87 5y ago
  One certainly can't get much more worse than worser.
  - dpwm 5y ago
    "much worser", perhaps?
DeathArrow 5y ago
>The benefits of distributes systems becomes bigger the larger the network. Replicate the same results with 100 nodes and we'll see. That's true. I would be interested in an experiment to show how many IPFS host would be needed to reach parity to FTP and other protocols. I'm also wondering if IPFS can't be integrated in CDNs.