You are reading content from Scuttlebutt
@Anders %W1a3g4D/ojzBiBD7VB7zZdBkGefwVOOHrDVQL1eL9po=.sha256
Re: %AQNGc9G+6

Thought it would be good with an update on this. On a local machine with basically no latency, partial replication is roughly the same speed as full replication except it replicates only around 30% the number of messages. This is with indexes, so there 2x overhead in the number of messages. If this was a new feed format instead where contacts would be neatly put in their own feed under the metafeed, this would be roughly ½ the number of messages.

Why is this not faster? First of all this is a raw throughput test. So while full replication is just as fast, it consumes a lot more cpu and bandwidth. Partial replication on the other hand, for each feed, first needs to discover the metafeed. Download that, find the index feeds and replicate those. When we tested this in manyverse the app was quite use-able while doing an initial sync. Secondly this is on a local device, it would be very interesting to test this on wifi between a phone and a desktop computer or to use netem.

Overall I think this mostly works (90-95% there). It is very dependant on how many machines in the network start using metafeeds, which is why manyverse on the desktop will be a big deal.

Join Scuttlebutt now