BitTorrent Turns 10: Happy Birthday | Hacker News Reader

BitTorrent Turns 10: Happy Birthday

torrentfreak.com

100 pointsUncle_Sam19 comments

An obvious use of BitTorrent would be to build a supercomputer on top of it. The biggest barrier to ad hoc computation is getting at the data. (John Carmack: "It pains me to have hundreds of cpu cores across the office idle, but data transport precludes most computation of opportunity" - http://twitter.com/#!/ID_AA_Carmack/status/61076521640665089). That is what BitTorrent is good for.

Especially for problems where all you need to do is divide your data into slices, apply some function, and assemble the results, BitTorrent already solves the hard part of this. (Edit: because the hard part is getting at the data in the first place, not computing over it and assembling the results.) That's what you're doing when you download a movie, it's just that the function is "identity" and the assembly is "concat".

So HN, how would you build this? has it been worked on? what am I missing?

The @home projects? I assume enough of their source is open, only because of how happy people are with it.

My question is about using BitTorrent for distributed computing. Do any of the @home projects use BitTorrent?

Underlying this is a desire for ad hoc computation, where the calculations to be performed don't have to be decided in advance. (Presumably this is also what Carmack means by "computation of opportunity".) You can't do this if you have to collect the data first. But if you know where the data already is, you can send the computations to it. It seems like the BitTorrent protocol would help here.

Wouldn't it be better to split up the datafiles for each node? Unless do you need a copy of the whole dataset?

I'm guessing my other comments in the thread address this. If not, can you explain further?

Twitter uses something like that http://engineering.twitter.com/2010/07/murder-fast-datacente...

But just for copying files. Facebook does the same to deploy their 1GB compiled binary. What I'm asking about is: instead of only copying data, why can't we apply arbitrary functions to it? After all, the hard part is not applying the functions, it's schlepping the data - and that's the part BitTorrent solves.

What you are describing is MapReduce, and it is the foundation on which google's empire is built.

I think I must be misunderstanding you. Are you talking about some p2p system for distributing the code/data to the nodes? Like a decentralised BOINC?

The bit about BT that makes it special is the tit-for-tat negotiation system, which prevents clients from "cheating" by downloading and not uploading. In an environment where there is no motive for an individual node to behave differently from the rest of the swarm for its own gain, then BT's unique benefits disappear.

I'm not talking about MapReduce but rather the back end presupposed by things like MapReduce. Let me try an example. Imagine some large dataset. All the stock trades ever, say. Or all the temperature readings ever. (Maybe these particular datasets don't exist, but some do.) Suppose some Saturday afternoon a question pops into your head. Wouldn't it be great to know, say, the average, max, and min temperatures in that dataset, maybe broken down across geographical buckets. How would you go about it? The hard part isn't computing averages - the difference between computing "average" and computing "identity" is practically negligible. The hard part is obtaining the data, arranging it in a suitable form, and then being able to get at it. You want the data to already exist in zillions of morsels on lots of different computers, have a fast way of discovering which morsels your computation needs, and a fast way of accessing those morsels. Ideally there would be many copies of each morsel, giving you a lot of choices about whom to talk to.

In other words, you want a decentralized, redundant morsel discoverer-replicator. To me this sounds like what BitTorrent already does with, say, movies. Any popular movie is already split into morsels and replicated a zillion times, so any particular download (computation, in our case) can immediately start running. Of course that's only true for files that are already well-seeded. But it's easy for anyone to come along with a new movie (dataset, in our case) and plug it in, making it easy for anyone else to download (compute with), and getting faster the more popular it becomes.

(MapReduce can do the computation easily... if you've first arranged all the data appropriately. But that "if" is what, in Carmack's words, "precludes most computation of opportunity.")

The reason I wonder if BitTorrent would be suitable for solving the hard part of this problem (discovering and transferring big data) is that it already has solved it, massively. What else would you need to get true ad hoc computation on arbitrary data? A query language, an evaluator for that language that knows how to compute with morsels and assemble the results (there's your MapReduce)... and what else?

Nice ideas. It sounds to me like you should be doing a Phd.

I work in a related area, which is why the idea occurred to me. To combine the two would be awesome, but is a long-term prospect.

One more point. You mentioned BOINC. I believe BOINC sends all input data to the client with each request. In other words, it's only good for computationally intensive tasks (lots of computation per unit of data). The same is true of GPGPU. That's why I brought up "average" as an example: it's a commonplace function that is not computionally intensive at all. The work is almost entirely in finding the data and accessing it.

What I really want to know, though, is who else has thought about using BitTorrent for this kind of thing, and what they think.

Your description reminds me of cassandra, though it is not the answer to your question.

Check out Spark, a framework for writing parallel machine learning jobs (among lots of other things) on top of hadoop. http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~matei/spark/

They need to keep data in memory and shuffle it around really fast. To do so, they use a bittorrent-variant algorithm. I think this is the paper that describes it - http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=7&s...

Interesting. Thank you. They revise Bittorrent for use inside data centers, where block sizes can be much larger and there aren't any malicious nodes. They prefer Bittorrent to alternatives because, through its broadcast overhead is higher, it scales better with number of nodes. One thing I didn't glean from the paper is whether the advantages of BT are unique to their framework or whether they would apply just as well to MapReduce.

BitTorrent fascinates me because it was a thought problem. The technology to support BitTorrent had been in place for years--the requisite bandwidth, processing power, and storage space--but nobody had conceived of a clear-enough implementation to execute the high concept of piecemeal transmission before Bram.

Most unsolved problems today are probably thought problems, not technical problems (excepting battery life and blanketed super-fast wireless).

It's interesting to think about the sorts of technologies that are more about knowledge than supporting infrastructure. A perfect example would be the telegraph, which was only developed about a century ago but could have easily been built in cruder forms going back 2 or 3 thousand years. It makes one wonder what sort of fundamental innovations will be discovered in the future and what sorts of things we are missing out on today merely out of ignorance.

This makes me feel old. At 23, that isn't good.

Thanks Bram, you made internet better place.

Happy Birthday BitTorrent!!!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com