Philosophical question: CPU/memory/disk cheaper than efficiency?
"Kelly Jones" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.org.user-groups.nmlug |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
And now, a philosophical question: If I have a program that runs slowly (or hogs so much CPU/memory/disk that it slows other processes to a crawl), is it cheaper to: % Work to re-code the program to be more efficient and use less resources? % Increase the amount of CPU/memory/disk I have, or buy another machine just to run this program? Someone told me this was a no-brainer, and that it was a generally accepted fact that computer CPU/memory/disk was much cheaper than programmer time. True? Have there been studies done on this? Articles written? -- We're just a Bunch Of Regular Guys, a collective group that's trying to understand and assimilate technology. We feel that resistance to new ideas and technology is unwise and ultimately futile. _______________________________________________ NMLUG mailing list [email protected] http://lists.b9.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nmlug