> This. Sometimes this, sometimes that, it depends really. > The talks about 30% (or even 300%!) impact based on a graph without any details or methodology, o

> This. Sometimes this, sometimes that, it depends really. > The talks about 30% (or even 300%!) impact based on a graph without any details or methodology, often itself based on a microbenchmark or a tweet that got viral is really not helping. Of course it's helping, everyone learned about CPU architecture, speculative execution, caches, and started trading AMD and INTC all of the sudden. But to be serious, doesn't "details and methodology" apply to any benchmarks we see on Twitter. Or do people automatically start buying more servers when they read that tweet. Anyone here did that? The point of that number is warn people to go and measure their own workload. Google measure and yay! not much of an impact. It's great news. Someone who does telephony and maybe is sending lots of tiny little UDP packets back and forth might be impacted. Should they start crying and running around, no. They should measure because it might affect them.