Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 14–29 | Cite as

Implications of the file names and user requested queries on Gnutella performance

  • Surendar Chandra
  • William Acosta


The Gnutella file sharing system allows a large number of peers to share their local files. However, it does not coordinate the way by which these shared objects are named or how they are searched by other users; such decisions are made independently by each peer. In this work, we investigate the practical performance implications of this design. We collected the shared filenames and user generated queries over a three-year period. We show the mismatch between these naming mechanisms. We show the fundamental limitations of Gnutella performance that cannot be addressed by improvements in overlays or by varying the search mechanisms alone. Based on our observations, we describe two practical approaches to improve Gnutella performance. We describe a mechanism to build the file term synopsis using the observed popularity of queries routed through the ultrapeer. We also describe a query transformation mechanism that improves the success rates for failed queries.


Gnutella Query Shared filenames Synopsis Query transformation 



This work was supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation (CNS-0447671).


  1. 1.
    Acosta W, Chandra S (2007) Improving search using a fault-tolerant overlay in unstructured P2P systems. In: IEEE ICPP ’07, p 5. Xian, China. doi:10.1109/ICPP.2007.48
  2. 2.
    Acosta W, Chandra S (2007) Trace driven analysis of the long term evolution of gnutella peer-to-peer traffic. In: Passive and active measurement conference (PAM’07)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Adamic LA, Lukose RM, Puniyani AR, Huberman BA (2001) Search in power-law networks. Phys Rev E 64:1–8. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.64.046135 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bangeman E (2008) Study: Bittorrent sees big growth, limewire still \(\sharp\)1 P2P app. Ars Technica. URL
  5. 5.
    Bloom BH (1970) Space/time trade-offs in hash coding with allowable errors. Commun ACM 13(7):422–426. doi:10.1145/362686.362692 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cai H, Gu P, Wang J (2007) ASAP: an advertisement-based search algorithm for unstructured peer-to-peer systems. In: IEEE ICPP’07. Xian, ChinaGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chandra S, Yu X (2011) An empirical analysis of serendipitous media sharing among campus-wide wireless users. ACM Trans Multimedia Comput Commun Appl (ACM TOMCCAP) 7(1):23Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chang N, Liu M (2004) Revisiting the TTL-based controlled flooding search: optimality and randomization. In: Mobicom ’04, pp 85–99. doi:10.1145/1023720.1023730
  9. 9.
    Chawathe Y, Ratnasamy S, Breslau L, Lanham N, Shenker S (2003) Making Gnutella-like P2P systems scalable. In: SIGCOMM ’03, pp 407–418. doi:10.1145/863955.864000
  10. 10.
    Chen H, Jin H, Liu Y, Ni LM (2007) Difficulty-aware hybrid search in peer-to-peer networks. In: IEEE international conference on parallel processing (ICPP’07)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohen E, Shenker S (2002) Replication strategies in unstructured peer-to-peer networks. In: SIGCOMM 2002, pp 177–190. doi:10.1145/633025.633043
  12. 12.
    Fessant FL, Handurukande S, Kermarrec AM, Massouli L (2004) Clustering in peer-to-peer file sharing workloads. In: IPTPS’04. San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    The Gnutella protocol specification v0.6.
  14. 14.
    Gravano L, Ipeirotis PG, Jagadish H, Koudas N, Muthukrishnan S, Srivastava D (2001) Approximate string joins in a database (almost) for free. In: Very large data bases (VLDB ’01). Rome, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gummadi KP, Dunn RJ, Saroiu S, Gribble SD, Levy HM, Zahorjan J (2003) Measurement, modeling, and analysis of a peer-to-peer file-sharing workload. In: Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM symposium on operating systems principles, pp 314–329. doi:10.1145/945445.945475
  16. 16.
    Jia D, Yee WG, Nguyen LT, Frieder O (2007) Distributed, automatic file description tuning in peer-to-peer file-sharing systems. In: IEEE P2P ’07, pp 167–176 (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Klingberg T, Manfredi R (2002) Gnutella 0.6.
  18. 18.
    Law C, Siu KY (2003) Distributed construction of random expander networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM’03, vol 3, pp 2133–2143Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Loo BT, Hellerstein JM, Huebsch R, Shenker S, Stoica I (2004) Enhancing P2P file-sharing with an internet-scale query processor. In: Very large data bases conference (VLDB’04), pp 432–443 (2004)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Loo BT, Huebsch R, Stoica I, Hellerstein JM (2004) The case for a hybrid P2P search infrastructure. In: IPTPS ’04, pp 141–150. San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lv Q, Cao P, Cohen E, Li K, Shenker S (2002) Search and replication in unstructured peer-to-peer networks. In: International conf. on supercomputing, pp 84–95. doi:10.1145/514191.514206
  22. 22.
    Massoulie L, Merrer EL, Kermarrec AM, Ganesh A (2006) Peer counting and sampling in overlay networks: random walk methods. In: PODC ’06, pp 123–132. doi:10.1145/1146381.1146402
  23. 23.
    Pucha H, Andersen DG, Kaminsky M (2007) Exploiting similarity for multi-source downloads using file handprints. In: Proc. 4th USENIX NSDI. Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Qiao Y, Bustamante FE (2006) Structured and unstructured overlays under the microscope: a measurement-based view of two P2P systems that people use. In: USENIX annual technical conference, pp 31–31Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rhea SC, Kubiatowicz J (2002) Probabilistic location and routing. In: IEEE INFOCOM ’02, vol 3, pp 1248–1257Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sripanidkulchai K (2001) The popularity of gnutella queries and its implications on scalability.
  27. 27.
    Stutzbach D, Rejaie R, Sen S (2008) Characterizing unstructured overlay topologies in modern P2P file-sharing systems. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 16(2):267–280. doi: 10.1109/TNET.2007.900406 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tang C, Dwarkadas S (2004) Hybrid global-local indexing peer-to-peer information retrieval. In: NSDI’04Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tsoumakos D, Roussopoulos N (2006) Analysis and comparison of P2P search methods. In: ACM InfoScale ’06, p 25. doi:10.1145/1146847.1146872
  30. 30.
    Wouhaybi RH, Campbell AT (2004) Phenix: supporting reilient low-diameter peer-to-peer topologies. In: IEEE INFOCOM’04, vol 1, p 119Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yang B, Garcia-Molina H (2002) Improving search in peer-to-peer networks. In: IEEE ICDCS ’02, p 5Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Yang CC, Kwok JS (2005) Changes in queries in Gnutella peer-to-peer networks. J Inf Sci 31(2):124–135. doi: 10.1177/0165551505050789 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Zaharia MA, Chandel A, Saroiu S, Keshav S (2007) Finding content in file-sharing networks when you can’t even spell. In: IPTPS’07. Bellevue, WAGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zaharia MA, Keshav S (2006) Gossip-based search selection in hybrid peer-to-peer networks. In: IPTPS ’06. Santa Barbara, CAGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zhao S, Stutzbach D, Rejaie R (2006) Characterizing files in the modern Gnutella network: a measurement study. In: Proceedings of SPIE/ACM multimedia computing and networking, vol 6071. San Jose, CAGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.FX Palo Alto Lab.Palo AltoUSA
  2. 2.Computer Science & Engineering Technology Program, Engineering Technology DepartmentThe University of ToledoToledoUSA

Personalised recommendations