[tuetuopay]

The NIC does not really have a lot to do with being IO bound.

IO bound means you spend most of your time waiting on an IO operation to complete. Usually writes are bound by the hardware (how fast your NIC is, how fast your storage is, ...), but reads are bounds by the hardware, but mostly by the "thing" that sends the data. So it's great you have a 10Gbps NIC, but if your database takes 10ms to run your query, you'll still be sitting for 10ms on your arse to read 1KB of data.

[withoutboats3]

In this context, we're talking about things for which the throughput is IO-bound. You're talking about the latency of an individual request.

Throughput being IO-bound is indeed about the hardware, and the truth is that at the high end it's increasingly uncommon for things to be IO-bound, because our NICs and disks continue to improve while our CPU cycles have stagnated.

[raggi]

In purely practical terms the old system interfaces are sufficiently problematic that for any workload with necessarily smaller buffers than tens of kb, most implementations will get stuck being syscall bound first. Spectre really didn’t help here either.

[vacuity]

I think this is where we have to really move towards the io_uring/FlexSC approach.