logoalt Hacker News

silisilitoday at 5:42 AM2 repliesview on HN

It's cool in a 'how much can you tune it' kind of way, but has little practical value. Most sites would be tickled with a 4 digit requests per second number, so does it matter if your chosen framework does 50k/sec or 3 million/sec? Not really.

I think the biggest problem was it just had too many entries, most of which seem tuned to cheating benchmarks. Would probably be more valuable just choosing the top 3 by popularity from the top 15 languages or so.


Replies

fredrikholmtoday at 9:04 AM

> too many entries, most of which seem tuned to cheating benchmarks

Even for entries that didn't cheat, the code was sometimes unidiomatic in the sense that "real programmers can write Fortran in any language".

This[0] article articulates the issue with by highlighting an ASP.NET implementation that was faster than more 'honest' Java/Go implementations primarily by not using ASP.NET features, skirting some philosophical line of what it means to use something.

For me, the more interesting discussion of whether a language/library is faster/leaner than another exists in actual idiomatic use. In some languages you are actively sweating over individual allocations; in some you're encouraged to allocate collections and immediately throw them away. Being highly concerned with memory and performance in the latter type of language happens, but is seldom the dominant approach in the larger ecosystem.

[0] https://dusted.codes/how-fast-is-really-aspnet-core

show 1 reply
re-thctoday at 10:45 AM

> most of which seem tuned to cheating benchmarks

The fix would have been requiring tests to catch the cheating. There were suggestions but it didn't happen.

It was definitely possible to catch not having sent date headers (or caching them) etc.