Will we be getting better vault managers in the next itteration? Iâm just sort of watching my vault and thinking that if we need to start worrying about gets and puts in order to manage data we also need to be able to manage vaults and get credit for our gets and puts. I restart a lot and so non persistant data comes into play. Therefore how do we configure vaults to give us credit across operating systems and what not? See what I mean? Or consider one might have multiple devices, again the same problem, how does one send their safecoin to the right address or keep from suffering from major reputation loss. If I restart from linux to windows but my computer is only down for like 5 minutes between boots I donât want a major reputation loss just because Iâve switched OSes. Or if I decide to farm on my android tablet or my laptop same deal. Again I donât know when safecoin itself will be implimented but it seems meet to start talking about vault management as we start making this transition.
Measuring bandwidth per node might prove more useful than either (1 per IP or 1 per CPU). I expect we will have some limit there: nodes with a less-than-minimum bandwidth (either because of a bad connection or because of too many vaults behind the same connection) would then just be disconnected.
But we havenât made a decision on how to do that in detail yet.
Slowing a whole network down due to some weak links isnât fair as well. Try to ride 30 MPH on a highway and see what trouble that causes. Second point to make: they just shut down the Vault. That doesnât mean people canât connect using a Launcher.
I agree: In the long run we definitely want the network to use any resource it can get, slow or fast.
For now, however, we donât have a set of different roles that we can assign to nodes, so every one needs to be capable to at least route messages to contribute to the network. But even with that, I hope the minimum will be low enough that a slow internet connection wonât be an obstacle - running 100 nodes behind it will, though.
Perhaps but that doesnât mean you ban people from using all the back roads and neighborhood streets as well. Remember weâre talking about the whole internet here, the whole city/country, whatever, not just the superhighway. Wouldnât it make more sense to shift the lower bandwidth people into a different lane or something somewhat like how you have different counters at the checkout counter at the store or even let someone with only a few groceries pass and go ahead of you for efficiency sake? Say you have a slow bandwidth person downloading a file thatâll take an hour and a fast bandwidth person thatâll take 2 minutes. Itâll make more sense for the fast bandwidth to go ahead in line and get done faster. But it would ALSO make sense that if there was a big line of high bandwidth users ahead of slow bandwidth users to simply create two lines so you didnât create a hold up for either. Also for low bandwidth couldnât we have a different file strategey? Like say break up a file even smaller so it downloads even faster? Say if your bandwidth is below x amount your files get flagged as low bandwidth and get rechunked to an even smaller size, like I dunno, 10kb each. That way you can download more chunks faster. Same idea as torrenting. Small bits downloading big files.
Vault usage allows one to farm safecoin. Safecoin allows one to post to the network. Running the launcher wonât do much good if one canât upload and post to the internet because one canât earn safecoin.
Nobody getâs banned. You confuse the Vaults from the network. With very slow connection you canât run a Vault but you can still be part of the network and even route data. Look, here it is:
Same here, vault purring like a kitting for well over 24 hours, no issues, virtually no CPU usage, only used 1.2GB data in 24 hours and all my accountâs data remains intact and accessible . What more can we ask for?
(Lost my first account but possibly through human error not sure)
A Vault disconnection could be saying, âhey, you bit off more than you can chew!â
Example
Perhaps the farmer has a <1Mbps Bandwith connection with 4TB storage capacity. At some point, their vault filled pass the upload capability. In other words, the vault can no longer keep up with GET requests, routing, caching, and consensus.
This is why I like the idea of Bandwith grading. The above situation can be avoided because the Network refuses to give a low Bandwith Vault more chunks than they can handle. And if their connection is really, really, really poor⌠then a ZERO vault may be another alternative.
For now, we need a performance Network. Otherwise, weâll have a hard time getting the general public to adopt.
I lost access to my first account, although the public ID is still taken. Was able to register a new one with the same credentials.
Im also not able to upload anything. Can register ID. But after an upload failed the first time I tried it wont let me register new services and upload or use template.
Edit: registering a whole new account with different credentials works. But if a folder fails to upload, most attempts at publishing/uploading fails on that account.
The demo app is also much slower on my mac than my win pc. (in getting auth)
Other than that, vaults running very smoothly on both.
I see similar behaviour - The original account I created will now not allow me to upload either private files, directories or public sites, whether on the template or as a pre=prepared folder containing index.html +css etc
Vault console output available (later) if its going to help.
EDIT: A new account works just fine, simply when I log on with the old credentials I cannot do much of anything