Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Boinbo

Tech myth debunk thread

Spotty

This thread is for TECHNOLOGY related myths only. The LTT forum is not the place for conspiracy theories about politicians and aliens. 

If the thread goes off topic again it will be locked and warnings may be issued.

Message added by Spotty

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Also, if a processor doing the first listing had fancy features like OoE and and superscalar pipelining while the second one was basically a super basic processor with a three-stage pipeline, the first one could potentially execute code faster even thought there's more lines of code.

Hence why I said:

1 hour ago, straight_stewie said:

If we assume that all other things about the processor are the same

 


"Ultimately, saying that you don’t care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is no different from saying you don’t care about freedom of speech because you have nothing to say." ~Verax

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, straight_stewie said:

Hence why I said:

And hence why I said the ISA largely doesn't matter, it's the implementation of it.

 

As long as instruction outputs what's expected, who cares how it's done?

 

On a side note, when people were looking into RISC, they found in a CISC CPU, even doing simpler instructions rather than the single instruction that achieves the same result could be faster.

 

EDIT: Also optimization is often counter-intuitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kisai said:

Demonstrably false. When the same quadcore machine can deal with 2000-4000 threads, but only deal with 100 prefork sessions, there is something certainly wrong with forking processes that has a lot more to do with programmer incompetence and/or laziness. You can not secure a web server. Period, and all you gain from preforking is being able to ignore memory leaks/stalls from crappy scripting languages.

Even if you are running multithreaded server, you still would need to run more process of these servers in order to scale out to other machines. This would be no different than forking beaucse that is what forking is, starting more process of the same program. A single computer, multithreaded or not, can not handle all the users in the world without poping up more of the same server processes on more computers. Multiprocess application can also have one process crashed, without taking the entire system offline, can multithreaded application not crashed if like say one thread segfaulted or raised any other unchecked exceptions? And security is not the reason why programmers fork. 

 

1 hour ago, Kisai said:

I'm not going to tell a news site to stop using WP if WP is what they designed their site for, but good grief the amount of money just being flushed down the toilet on hosting costs by using WP is nothing to sneeze at.

Who cares? companies deal with it by simply adding more machines and scaled out. One reason they choose horribly slow and inefficient scripting languages like JavaScript and php over c++ or c for web development is because of productivity and scalability. It is easier to implement new features in these languages and make them work with other technologies like extension or what nots as you said earlier than in C or C++ and easier to scale them out to more computers if performance is becoming an issue due to increased users, traffics, or what nots. In web devs, productivity and scalability outweighs whatever performance you think you may gain from multithreading vs forking or scripting vs native code in C/C++. Whatever increased cost for more hardware or servers due to slow performance can be compensated by the increased productivity and reduce cost of development. 


Sudo make me a sandwich 

 

Check out my guide on creating your own private cloud storage

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

If you're using hardware from a not-obscure vendor, Microsoft typically pushes driver updates through Windows update. Though the driver isn't likely to be up-to-date, not that it matters most of the time anyway.

Exactly :P

especially since windows 10

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, wasab said:

Even if you are running multithreaded server, you still would need to run more process of these servers in order to scale out to other machines.

Come back to me when you have experience running a server.

 

You missed the entire point that this lack of threading is why a computer needs more memory, because it has to duplicate the process memory for every fork. Every tab in Chrome is chewing up a few hundred MB of memory when it could be using kilobytes. And your answer is "get another computer per tab"

 

So each time that involves large memory copies, virtual memory allocation, and so forth. Machines are only getting slower because of this incompetence.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Kisai said:

Come back to me when you have experience running a server.

I do

54 minutes ago, Kisai said:

You missed the entire point that this lack of threading is why a computer needs more memory, because it has to duplicate the process memory for every fork. Every tab in Chrome is chewing up a few hundred MB of memory when it could be using kilobytes. And your answer is "get another computer per tab"

I told you that no one cares and it doesnt matter. Saying forking is bad because it consumes more memory is like saying windows 10 is worse performing OS than windows 98 or chrome is a worse performing websrowser than internet explorer because they eat up more ram. It makes no sense. 

 

54 minutes ago, Kisai said:

So each time that involves large memory copies, virtual memory allocation, and so forth. Machines are only getting slower because of this incompetence.

Modern day data centers still run on tape drive. I seriously do not understand why you keep talking about speed, memory, and whatever when these arent an issue while productivity,feasibility, reliability, and availability are.


Sudo make me a sandwich 

 

Check out my guide on creating your own private cloud storage

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, wasab said:

I do

I told you that no one cares and it doesnt matter. Saying forking is bad because it consumes more memory is like saying windows 10 is worse performing OS than windows 98 or chrome is a worse performing websrowser than internet explorer because they eat up more ram. It makes no sense. 

 

Modern day data centers still run on tape drive. I seriously do not understand why you keep talking about speed, memory, and whatever when these arent an issue while productivity,feasibility, reliability, and availability are.

I doubt you do, and you're just posting your usual nonsense. 

 

16 servers with 4 cores/w 64GB each ($1575USD/ea Poweredge R240) = $25200

4 servers with 16 cores and 256GB ram ($7400 USD/ea Poweredge r6515) = $29600

 

Guess which you're allowed to put on a 15A circuit? 4 if you're lucky.

42U rack with 15A and 1000Mbps, $400/mo

 

So the monthly costs for the bottom configuration is $400/mo, the monthly cost for the top configuration is $1600/mo. If you're going to operate servers, you want the lowest costs, and that means if your requirements can be had with 64 cores in one 15A circuit rather than 4 15A circuits, you're going to do that.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Kisai said:

16 servers with 4 cores/w 64GB each ($1575USD/ea Poweredge R240) = $25200

4 servers with 16 cores and 256GB ram ($7400 USD/ea Poweredge r6515) = $29600

And if servers are multithreaded, that just magically reduce the cost? Give me a break. 


Sudo make me a sandwich 

 

Check out my guide on creating your own private cloud storage

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if it's a common misconception, but one that came to mind: Storage performance is all that matters in loading performance.

 

In some respect, yes, it is. The faster you can get something onto RAM, the faster the loading process can go. However, storage performance is only half the story, the other half is the processor. Just because the application's data is in RAM doesn't mean it's actually ready to use by the user. The processor has to initialize things before the application can be ready. In extreme cases, a faster processor with an HDD can match a slower processor with an SSD.

 

Think about it this way, Windows on my PC typically sits at around 1.5GB of RAM usage after a fresh boot. It lives on an NVMe drive capable of delivering 3GB/sec. So how come it still takes something like 5-10 seconds after POST to actually get to the login screen?

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

I don't know if it's a common misconception, but one that came to mind: Storage performance is all that matters in loading performance.

 

In some respect, yes, it is. The faster you can get something onto RAM, the faster the loading process can go. However, storage performance is only half the story, the other half is the processor. Just because the application's data is in RAM doesn't mean it's actually ready to use by the user. The processor has to initialize things before the application can be ready. In extreme cases, a faster processor with an HDD can match a slower processor with an SSD.

 

Think about it this way, Windows on my PC typically sits at around 1.5GB of RAM usage after a fresh boot. It lives on an NVMe drive capable of delivering 3GB/sec. So how come it still takes something like 5-10 seconds after POST to actually get to the login screen?

This leads to what may be a more common one: “SSD’s make everything faster.”  Saw this one recently with someone trying to “update” some ancient Celeron laptops with soldered CPUs because they were “too slow to use” It would make stuff load faster, but I didn’t think it would do much good other than that.  There’s only so much that can be done with ancient celeron  laptops.


Life is like a bowl of chocolates: there are all these little crinkly paper cups everywhere.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×