Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

techempower.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 358 posts

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#121

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

saosebastiao wrote: post #15

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…

Without advocates "conspiring", the results will favor those frameworks which are most suited to the chosen tasks, as configured by the testers. With conspiring, the results will favor those frameworks with a community who cares about contributing a superoptimized microbenchmark config. In either case, the results might be good discussion fodder, but should be taken with a grain of salt.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#122

Post by bhauer »

diroussel wrote: post #93
bhauer wrote: post #2

This is the most recent update to our ongoing project measuring the performance of web application platforms and frameworks. In this round we've received several more community-contributed tests in Perl, PHP, Python, Java, and JavaScript. Go is a comeback champion thanks to changes made by Brad Fitzpatrick [1] and others in the Go community. A new "Fortunes" test was also added (implemented in 17 of the frameworks) t…

The requests per second is importanct, but some frameworks seem to get high average throughput but at the expense of a few slow requests. Also when measuring latency, average and std dev are only revelent if the distribution is guassian in distrition. Which is unlikely. Better to show percentile based measurements. Like 90% of all requests served in 5ms, and 99% of requests served in 15ms. See Gil Tene's talk "How no…

Hello diroussel,

Thanks for the feedback! We started the project with WeigHTTP, then starting with Round 2 we switched to Wrk [1] at the advice of other readers. Wrk provides latency measurements consisting of average, standard deviation, and maximum.

See the earlier conversation about standard deviation here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5455972

If we had distribution data available, we would aim to provide that in some form. And perhaps the author of Wrk could add that in time.

However, for the time being, I consider the matter somewhat academic. Not to be dismissive--I value your opinion--but I don't believe that would measurably impact my assessment of each framework's performance. Though, it would be fascinating to be able to validate my suspicion that Onion, being written in C, does not suffer even the tiny garbage collection pauses of the Java frameworks.

[1] https://github.com/wg/wrk

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#123

Post by manulp »

pfalls wrote: post #53
manulp wrote: post #46

Any chance of seing the python frameworks behind uwsgi instead of gunicorn?

Here is the issue for just that: https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/issues/11... If you're interested, we'd love to have some help getting this accomplished.

I might not be qualified for the task, but I'll try to come up with something.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#124

Post by bhauer »

seldo wrote: post #120

Feature request: it would be nice to have permalinks (even if they were really messy URLs) to filter-sets so that I can share the slice of the benchmarks I'm looking at with people, without having to list the filters manually.

Agreed! I had hoped to do that in this round but simply ran out of time. I will make it a priority. I'd love to allow people to share specific comparisons with one another.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#126

Post by pjmlp »

hippich wrote: post #57

Whenever I hear "Java" I also get association "slow". But looking into this list - java web frameworks doing incredible job!

That was only true in the 1.x days, before JIT was the default in most VMs and native code compilers were available.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#129

Post by marcosdumay »

mikkelewis wrote: post #72
why-el wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always assumed the slowness is associated with build times and such. You are slow developing a Java web app, but not running it.

and GUIs.

At the time Java gained its fame, the GUI applications were unresponsive, not slow.

They could lock at any time, for a perceptible few hundreds of miliseconds, but had still a nice average speed.

Re: Web Framework Benchmarks Round 4

#130

Post by mitchi »

dataminer wrote: post #125
mitchi wrote: post #18

http://openresty.org/ Looks interesting but at a quick glance it looks like you are programming in configuration files? I'm not sure I like the idea.

You can try Lapis http://leafo.net/lapis/ its a new framework built on openresty.

Looks great!!!
Post reply on HN