Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
bbs.studygolang.com
Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
1–10 of 168 posts
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#2Here is the original link:
http://blog.safariflow.com/2013/02/22/go-as-an-alternative-t...
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#3So beyond the ironic comment mentioned before with the Golang Hello world tutorial using Chinese, what is the real reason behind the Chinese following behind Go?
It seems like this site confirm there must be a pretty dedicated Golang following, but I cannot figure out for the life of me why. Does anyone actually know?
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#4So beyond the ironic comment mentioned before with the Golang Hello world tutorial using Chinese, what is the real reason behind the Chinese following behind Go? It seems like this site confirm there must be a pretty dedicated Golang following, but I cannot figure out for the life of me why. Does anyone actually know?
For me, Go has the least "What the hell does this code do?" and "Why isn't this code working?" of any language I've ever used.
I'd say Go isn't an impressive programming language, but a very impressive software engineering language.
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#5So beyond the ironic comment mentioned before with the Golang Hello world tutorial using Chinese, what is the real reason behind the Chinese following behind Go? It seems like this site confirm there must be a pretty dedicated Golang following, but I cannot figure out for the life of me why. Does anyone actually know?
Not necessarily. I suppose the hello world tutorial shows hello world in Chinese mostly to show Unicode. And as for this link, this is just an external link (http://blog.safariflow.com/2013/02/22/go-as-an-alternative-t...) that someone posted on a forum. Things like these happen on every forum in every country.
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#6If you read the original blog post on http://blog.safariflow.com/2013/02/22/go-as-an-alternative-t..., one of the commentators actually attempted the comparison between node.js and go, and his results for node.js was significantly faster.
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#7Is it possible to write Go in a functional way? Are there first class functions? Anonymous functions? If so it seems it would be possible to write highly functional code given the flexibility of interface{}
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#8If you read the original blog post on http://blog.safariflow.com/2013/02/22/go-as-an-alternative-t... , one of the commentators actually attempted the comparison between node.js and go, and his results for node.js was significantly faster.
Go version 1.1 was more than a significant increase in net handling speed.
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#9Is it possible to write Go in a functional way? Are there first class functions? Anonymous functions? If so it seems it would be possible to write highly functional code given the flexibility of interface{}
[deleted]
Re: Go as an alternative to Node.js for very fast servers
#10I did the benchmarks outlined at the end of the article.
Summary of results:
1. Node.js v0.10.15, single worker: 46.2 seconds
2. Node.js v0.10.15, cluster 8 workers using naught: 17.2 seconds
3. Go 1.0.2, GOMAXPROCS left default: 3.5 seconds
4. Go 1.0.2, GOMAXPROCS=8: 3.7 seconds
Detailed results below:
1. Node.js v0.10.15, single worker
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 46.217 seconds
Complete requests: 10000
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Total transferred: 10486510000 bytes
HTML transferred: 10485760000 bytes
Requests per second: 216.37 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 462.168 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 4.622 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 221580.08 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 0 0 0.2 0 3
Processing: 193 461 36.2 450 944
Waiting: 16 235 127.3 235 534
Total: 193 461 36.2 450 944
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 450
66% 467
75% 470
80% 486
90% 492
95% 514
98% 517
99% 545
100% 944 (longest request)
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 17.199 seconds
Complete requests: 10000
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Total transferred: 10486510000 bytes
HTML transferred: 10485760000 bytes
Requests per second: 581.41 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 171.995 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 1.720 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 595408.80 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 0 0 0.2 0 3
Processing: 7 171 116.4 149 739
Waiting: 5 96 81.9 71 710
Total: 8 171 116.5 150 740
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 150
66% 197
75% 236
80% 266
90% 324
95% 397
98% 438
99% 493
100% 740 (longest request)
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 3.542 seconds
Complete requests: 10000
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Total transferred: 10486730000 bytes
HTML transferred: 10485760000 bytes
Requests per second: 2823.16 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 35.421 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 0.354 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 2891181.71 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 0 1 0.3 1 3
Processing: 9 35 2.2 34 56
Waiting: 0 1 1.3 1 22
Total: 12 35 2.3 35 57
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 35
66% 36
75% 36
80% 36
90% 37
95% 38
98% 39
99% 41
100% 57 (longest request)
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 3.657 seconds
Complete requests: 10000
Failed requests: 0
Write errors: 0
Total transferred: 10486730000 bytes
HTML transferred: 10485760000 bytes
Requests per second: 2734.54 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 36.569 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 0.366 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 2800429.67 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 0 1 0.4 1 3
Processing: 19 36 2.5 35 57
Waiting: 0 1 1.1 1 16
Total: 20 37 2.5 36 58
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 36
66% 37
75% 37
80% 37
90% 38
95% 39
98% 42
99% 51
100% 58 (longest request)