<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: How much power is used when you do a Google search?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 10:56:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Nielsen</title>
		<link>http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/comment-page-1/#comment-11259</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Nielsen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:22:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/?p=369#comment-11259</guid>
		<description>Hi Jonathan - Yep, you&#039;re right.  On average, I guess that means that somewhat more than 50 computers are involved in uncached queries, and less than 50 in cached queries.

(It seems like 1 computer may be enough for the cached queries, but I don&#039;t know enough about how Google&#039;s redundant filesystem works to be sure of that.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jonathan &#8211; Yep, you&#8217;re right.  On average, I guess that means that somewhat more than 50 computers are involved in uncached queries, and less than 50 in cached queries.</p>
<p>(It seems like 1 computer may be enough for the cached queries, but I don&#8217;t know enough about how Google&#8217;s redundant filesystem works to be sure of that.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ernesto</title>
		<link>http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/comment-page-1/#comment-11165</link>
		<dc:creator>Ernesto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:29:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/?p=369#comment-11165</guid>
		<description>Google also works as a calculator. Interestingly, there are unstated limits on what it&#039;ll calculate for you free of charge.

Try typing in &quot;100!&quot; and &quot;1000!&quot;and you&#039;ll see what I mean.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Google also works as a calculator. Interestingly, there are unstated limits on what it&#8217;ll calculate for you free of charge.</p>
<p>Try typing in &#8220;100!&#8221; and &#8220;1000!&#8221;and you&#8217;ll see what I mean.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2008-04-21</title>
		<link>http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/comment-page-1/#comment-11139</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2008-04-21</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 07:35:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/?p=369#comment-11139</guid>
		<description>[...] Michael Nielsen » How much power is used when you do a Google search? Interesting things happen when you use Google. (tags: technology Google clustercomputing Computer supercomputer) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Michael Nielsen » How much power is used when you do a Google search? Interesting things happen when you use Google. (tags: technology Google clustercomputing Computer supercomputer) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Hunt</title>
		<link>http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/how-much-power-is-used-when-you-do-a-google-search/comment-page-1/#comment-11131</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Hunt</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2008 00:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://michaelnielsen.org/blog/?p=369#comment-11131</guid>
		<description>One additional question that might be important in this approximation is the fraction of novel queries. Google can cache the results of common queries (i.e. searching for &quot;Britney Spears&quot; is probably computational cheaper for Google than for &quot;lateral geniculate nucleus&quot;).

OTOH. As Google attempts to deliver personalized results, using your web history to optimize the results for you, this caching will be less important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One additional question that might be important in this approximation is the fraction of novel queries. Google can cache the results of common queries (i.e. searching for &#8220;Britney Spears&#8221; is probably computational cheaper for Google than for &#8220;lateral geniculate nucleus&#8221;).</p>
<p>OTOH. As Google attempts to deliver personalized results, using your web history to optimize the results for you, this caching will be less important.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

