[twic]

> You optimize for what you need; there is no absolute best thing. If you have fantastic latency, but your throughput is not good enough to meet your needs, then, no, latency is not more important.

The whole point of this post is that if you have low latency, there are easy ways to trade it away for better throughput. Whereas there are not easy ways to trade high throughput for better latency. And, therefore, latency is fundamentally more important.

[scott_s]

And my point is that absent knowing what your needs are, it's silly to talk about what is "more important". Because of the lopsided nature of the tradeoff (small latency harm for big throughput gain), it's dangerous to keep around "latency is more important" as a mantra.