Live data from Hacker News

Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

techempower.com

41–50 of 358 posts

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#41
I know the following is small, but surprised Pyramid didn't make the cut. I've used it for a couple of projects outside of work, and among the several other web frameworks I've worked with (Struts, Play, Django), it seems relatively mature and well documented.

http://docs.pylonsproject.org/projects/pyramid/en/1.4-branch...

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#42
post #21

I love what you guys are doing. This is by far the most comprehensive (in terms of number of frameworks) comparison of web frameworks. I also am a big fan of the new filtering metadata. However, I'm starting to think that all of the advocates of various frameworks are now conspiring independently to make this comparison meaningless...any framework (except Cake for some reason) can be superoptimized towards a small se…

Thanks for the kind words. We're very interested in adding additional tests, this round even includes a new test dubbed "Fortunes" which does in fact do server-side templating. We have an open github issue[1] asking for the community's input for just this sort of thing, and we'd love to have your feedback included. [1] https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/issues/13...

[deleted]

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#43
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because the server is not running Windows? Edit: yeah right Mono and w/e

Would it be too much to ask to also run a Windows VM? Or use Mono?

http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=motivation

"As with the previous question, we'd love to. We have heard tentative word from a reader/contributor that a pull request may be incoming soon that will include several .NET frameworks on Mono, which we assume will be as easy to include as any other pull request. One challenge we face is that the test infrastructure we've built assumes a Linux deployment that we can automate using ssh and Python. To do a proper .NET test on Windows Servers, we will need to work on adapting that platform to automate Windows Servers as well. Community assistance on this would be greatly appreciated."

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#44
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that PHP is particularly fast, but I notice that Raw PHP does about middle of the pack, but all of the ORM versions seem to do terribly. Interesting stuff. I've usually had pretty good luck with Slim, I'll have to try a version with & without redbean and see how big a difference it makes.

If their FAQ's page is saying what I think it does, then they aren't testing with memcache or opcode caching. Also no love for Yii.

[deleted]

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#45

For those new to these benchmarks, all of the source code is up on github: https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks We welcome all pull requests, suggestions and criticisms.

Any chance you could add JEE6? The two major JSF 2.1 implementations MyFaces and Mojarra are both missing. I don't expect awesome performance numbers, but since JSF2.1 is the 'official' (sigh) web framework of JEE6, it would be interesting how awful they are compared to some of these other languages.

I guess though if this is only testing JSON serialization, it may not make sense. Perhaps adding JAX-RS implementations like CXF, Jersey, RESTEasy, and RESTLet would be more appropriate.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#48
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that PHP is particularly fast, but I notice that Raw PHP does about middle of the pack, but all of the ORM versions seem to do terribly. Interesting stuff. I've usually had pretty good luck with Slim, I'll have to try a version with & without redbean and see how big a difference it makes.

Actually, as soon as a lot of db connections are involved, PHP jumps to the head of the pack. Which means that in most common web use cases (which are db heavy), PHP is as fast as any of them, since all the slowdowns (initialization, slow Zend engine etc) are dwarfed out by the fast db handling.

Raw PHP (with no framework, no ORM) does well in the 20 query test, but unfortunately you have to go down pretty far before any of the PHP frameworks show up on that list.

If I filter to just show PHP, the 20 query test shows that the first framework is less than 50% the performance of raw PHP.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#49
I really don't like these benchmarks. Its like benchmarking Fizzbuzz or something. Frameworks don't do anything. No one chooses a framework (at least I don't) based on performance. You choose one framework over the other because you like the API and/or language. I myself am a framework author (giotto, a python framework that was not included in these benchmarks). If my framework had been included, I'm sure it would end up dead last. When I built it, I wasn't thinking about performance, I was focusing on building a framework that would result in applications that are easy to understand/debug and fast to write.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#50
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe because the server is not running Windows? Edit: yeah right Mono and w/e

Would it be too much to ask to also run a Windows VM? Or use Mono?

Linux amd64 is the dominate internet serving platform; supporting a non-free OS for the benefit of a single test entry seems dumb. I'm all for a Mono entry however.
Post reply on HN