Lets talk about fibers

[Steven Schveighoffer via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/5/15 7:29 AM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>" wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 June 2015 at 22:28:52 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> anyone give a reason why we need to. deadalnix talked about load
>> balancing that way, but you gave good reasons as to why that didn't
>> make sense,
>
> What good reasons?
>
> By the time you get response from your shared memcache or database the
> x86 cache level 1 and possibly 2 is cold. And cache level 3 is shared,
> so there is no cache penalty for switching cores. Add to this that
> two-and-two cores share primary caches so if you don't pair tasks that
> address the same memory you loose up to 10-20% performance in addition
> to unused capacity and increased latency.

I think I'll go with Liran's experience over your hypothetical 
anecdotes. You seem to have a lot of academic knowledge, but I'd rather 
see what actually happens. If you have that data, please share.

-Steve