Hacker News Reader

Comment by ninkendo | Hacker News Reader

… not everyone uses the cloud?

Some people, gasp, run physical hardware, that they bought.

So you buy exact same generation of Intel and AMD chips to your developers than your servers and your cutomsers? And encode this requirement into your development process for the future?

[flagged]

We use physical hardware at work, but it's still not the way you build/deploy unless it's for a workstation/laptop type thing.

If you're deploying the binary to more than one machine, you quickly run into issues where the CPUs are different and you would need to rebuild for each of them. This is feasible if you have a couple of machines that you generally upgrade together, but quickly falls apart at just slightly more than 2 machines.

And all your deployed and dev machines run the same spec- same CPU entirely?

And you use them for remote development?

I think this is highly unusual.

Lots of organizations buy many of a single server spec. In fact that should be the default plan unless you have a good reason to buy heterogeneous hardware. With the way hardware depreciation works they tend to move to new server models “in bulk” as well, replacing entire clusters/etc at once. I’m not sure why this seems so foreign to folks…

Nobody is saying dev machines are building code that ships to their servers though… quite the opposite, a dev machine builds software for local use… a server builds software for running on other servers. And yes, often build machines are the same spec as the production ones, because they were all bought together. It’s not really rare. (Well, not using the cloud in general is “rare” but, that’s what we’re discussing.)

There is a large subset of devs who have worked their entire career on abstracted hardware which is fine I guess, just different domains.

The size of your L1/L2/L3 cache or the number of TLB misses doesn't matter too much if your python web service is just waiting for packets.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com