[acg]

That wasn't the point. Is the network really "slower by orders of magnitude" than disk? Why is using the network such a silly idea, considering network speeds are more than keeping up. Was the reference just referring to protocols. I was hoping for some accuracy: something to back up the statement.

[brigade]

No, it was referring to bandwidth and latency.

30ms latency is basically the best-case scenario you can expect for consumer internet (with a nearby datacenter and all that.) 10ms latency is about the worst-case latency for a rotational disk. And almost no consumer internet outside of Japan or South Korea is going to get more than 2 MB/s of real bandwidth, compared to 100 MB/s of real bandwidth from rotational hard drives.

Throw wireless or uploading into the mix (who's going to use a Chromebook over ethernet?) and it's even worse.

[stcredzero]

> Is the network really "slower by orders of magnitude" than disk?

Congrats on asking this question, because it's a window into a foundational fact of life in computer programming and technology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_hierarchy

You can feel good about gaining important knowledge. (Advanced exercise: extrapolate from the implications of not having known one piece of fundamental knowledge, then take action.)