[1/2] It seems like one side effect of standard server stacks being so slow is that when you go to rent a dedicated server, you get something with massively more horsepower than its uplink could really use.
-
Show this thread
-
[2/2] Pricing out one server provider, their _lowest_ horsepower machines ran from ~$60/mo for 86 cycles _per byte_ to ~$130/mo for 217 cycles per byte of traffic. Granted, HTTPS takes some of that away by being spectacularly awful, but still. 217 cycles for every single byte!
8 replies 1 retweet 35 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @cmuratori
Do you know of any good resource that explains cycles per byte? Or rather not the concept itself (which I did google), but more of the context: what's a lot, what's a little etc.? Would really love to learn what one _should_ expect from todays servers and software stacks.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MarcoBehler
It's very contextual, so there's not a lot of ways to explain it other than "know what your code is doing and how many cycles that takes". The reason 217 is a very high number is that these are the lowest-priced servers, so you would expect them to be for the simplest jobs...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cmuratori @MarcoBehler
Like running blogs or doing ecommerce sites or whatnot (eg., not "video processing" or something). But the reality is that thanks to things like WordPress and such, 217 cycles per byte is probably a very reasonable number to expect because of the massive inefficiency.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
To put it in perspective, it would be odd for your main loop on one of these machines to not average something like 2 32-wide instructions per cycle. That means every cycle, you can do something (add, xor, etc.) 64 bytes. So 217 cycles per byte is like ~14k operations!
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.