On 24/06/2015 13:50, Alec Ten Harmsel wrote: > P.P.S. Also, on 1% better performance: My professor for the compilers > class I took used to (maybe still does) work at Google. Apparently > Google sees a <1% increase in performance as *the best thing ever*, > because it can save them a bunch of money in infrastructure and power. > Apparently Google are the ultimate ricers.
Sounds like a case where Google already did the sensible optimizations long long ago and are now hitting the diminishing returns from the long tail. There are probably many of these and they all add up. One thing I've learned about Google's setup - there's nothing else like it out there and they are truly unique. Almost nothing Google does to optimize their setup is widely applicable to anything else :-) Take their power density. Last figures I have is they were running at 4x the kW per square foot as anyone else with a brain. This terrifies people who know about cooling. But, that's the setup and that's what Google has to work with. Now suddenly, all those lots of little improvements start to become a huge deal. So yes, ultimate ricers. Also the ultimates in "riding-co-close-to-the-edge-you-fall-off-the-cliff" :-) -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
