• tal@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Honestly, it’ll be more efficient to have memory in a datacenter in that hardware in a datacenter will see higher average capacity utilization, but it’s gonna drive up datacenter prices too.

    • Jason2357@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not sure I agree. Centralizing storage, and especially memory, creates incredible round trip costs.

      • tal@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        I mean, efficient in terms of memory utilization, like. Obviously there are gonna be associated costs and drawbacks with having remote compute.

        Just that if the world has only N GB of RAM, you can probably get more out of it on some system running a bunch of containers, where any inactive memory gets used by some other container.

    • BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      But imagine the latency and network bandwidth issues, there’s a reason most companies moved away from the huge central framework model to distributed computing

    • MountingSuspicion@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      As a dirty commie, I agree, but unfortunately under capitalism it is just an avenue for exploitation. Large companies are deciding what we can or cannot have access to and setting the price for it in a manner completely divorced from what they’re offering.