Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2 • Hacker News Board

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#51

Post by boundlessdreamz » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:06 PM UTC

This is superb.

1. More sorting options please :) I really want to sort by standard deviation.

2. Also in case of rails and other single threaded frameworks are you spinning up multiple processes?

3. Why is Go not being tested in the Database access tests?

4. Can you test rails with unicorn too?

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#52

Post by ConstantineXVI » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:07 PM UTC

mdlthree wrote: post #46

As an amateur hacker and after 275 days of reading Hacker News I feel I can now navigate in the sea of client side Javascript frameworks. With the introduction of this data on web framework performance, I now have another set of choices that I am completely unqualified to comprehend. My first impression is that this data shows about 3 levels of web frameworks. At the bottom (slowest) we have Django's and Rails and ma…

Most of these are bound to a language: choose a language first (and my answer to that question is "whichever one you're happiest working in and can get the job done"), then figure out which backend to use. You can fret over the framework more after you've already built something that works.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#53

Post by keammo1 » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:08 PM UTC

krg wrote: post #37

keammo1 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there somewhere we can see the settings for APC? Thanks for the great work!

https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/tree/mast... See php.ini, php-fpm.conf.

I could be missing something, but it looks like you are using the default settings. Have you tried tweaking it all? Specifically setting apc.stat=0, which will stop it from checking the mtime. You'll need to clear the cache with apc_clear_cache() when you make code changes though. You may also want to look at apc.php to check for fragmentation and adjust apc.shm_size if necessary

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#54

Post by avenger123 » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:08 PM UTC

mdlthree wrote: post #46

As an amateur hacker and after 275 days of reading Hacker News I feel I can now navigate in the sea of client side Javascript frameworks. With the introduction of this data on web framework performance, I now have another set of choices that I am completely unqualified to comprehend. My first impression is that this data shows about 3 levels of web frameworks. At the bottom (slowest) we have Django's and Rails and ma…

All metrics are meaningless without context.

I like these comparisons. It's unlikely that anyone is going to pick a framework for their project based on just this alone.

I find its good "food for thought" as it provides me exposure to frameworks that perhaps I can use one day but also to learn more about.

The most interesting aspect is all the code for each framework to do the simple page output, the queries, etc. can be viewed for each framework. I find this an incredible learning tool as it shows the personality of each framework/language.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#55

Post by cmsimike » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:11 PM UTC

mdlthree wrote: post #46

As an amateur hacker and after 275 days of reading Hacker News I feel I can now navigate in the sea of client side Javascript frameworks. With the introduction of this data on web framework performance, I now have another set of choices that I am completely unqualified to comprehend. My first impression is that this data shows about 3 levels of web frameworks. At the bottom (slowest) we have Django's and Rails and ma…

IMO if you build a product and it is working, there really is not much reason to redo your efforts in a higher performance framework unless your needs require you to do so. If you are at your current hardware's limits and you can't throw more hardware at it (for whatever reason), it may make sense in that case. If you want to reduce the amount of servers you currently have, it also makes sense there. http://blog.iron.io/2013/03/how-we-went-from-30-servers-to-2... This is a great post talking about going from 30 servers using Ruby to 2 servers using Go.

Use case example - Twitter was using Rails on the front-end for a while but it got to the point where using it made little sense. Part of Rails' performance is dependent on caching - which is really hard, if not impossible, to do well when you are dealing with live data.

FYI, Gemini is our framework that we've built and maintain internally. You probably won't find reference to it (except for out blog).

edit This is the link to Twitter's blog about Rails http://engineering.twitter.com/2011/04/twitter-search-is-now...

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#56

Post by mike-- » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:12 PM UTC

migth be interesting to add Erlang.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#57

Post by charlesjshort » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:12 PM UTC

Any thoughts of putting some Erlang in there?

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#58

Post by pfalls » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:13 PM UTC

BryantD wrote: post #48

I apologize if this question has been asked and answered, but why is netty missing from the database tests? No ORM?

The short answer is that at some point, we kept adding more and more tests on our own, which kept the blog from going out, and we finally decided to have a cutoff date and let the community continue adding tests that they were interested in. I think adding a database test to Netty (as well as Go for that matter) would be a great addition.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#59

Post by pfalls » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:15 PM UTC

avenger123 wrote: post #54

mdlthree wrote: post #46

As an amateur hacker and after 275 days of reading Hacker News I feel I can now navigate in the sea of client side Javascript frameworks. With the introduction of this data on web framework performance, I now have another set of choices that I am completely unqualified to comprehend. My first impression is that this data shows about 3 levels of web frameworks. At the bottom (slowest) we have Django's and Rails and ma…

All metrics are meaningless without context. I like these comparisons. It's unlikely that anyone is going to pick a framework for their project based on just this alone. I find its good "food for thought" as it provides me exposure to frameworks that perhaps I can use one day but also to learn more about. The most interesting aspect is all the code for each framework to do the simple page output, the queries, etc. ca…

"I like these comparisons. It's unlikely that anyone is going to pick a framework for their project based on just this alone."

This is exactly right, performance is one of many items to consider when building your own website, and while we're aiming to have a very comprehensive and useful set of performance data, we would agree that other factors need to be taken into account.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 2

#60

Post by pfalls » Fri, Apr 05, 2013, 4:17 PM UTC

kbd wrote: post #50

What about Puma ( http://puma.io ), Goliath ( http://goliath.io ) or Unicorn ( http://unicorn.bogomips.org/ ) instead of Passenger in the Ruby stack?

We're looking into moving to unicorn as the community has suggested. If anyone is interested in setting up Puma or Goliath, we'd be interested in testing those out as well.