3 ms·
You're not completely wrong, the difference is that there is no configuration necessary, no permanent infrastructure, no limitations on scalability, and the cos
by Mizza 11y ago
You're not completely wrong, the difference is that there is no configuration necessary, no permanent infrastructure, no limitations on scalability, and the costs are measured in milliseconds. AWS just takes care of everything. It's just _python manage.py deploy prod_ and you're done.
Obviously there are still ways that this can be optimized since Django wasn't really designed to be used like this, but it still seems performant enough for me, and the other advantages gained are major.
Response times for a warm server are almost always <200ms, averaging just over 100ms (we did some tests on reddit yesterday.) In my own tests just now, I was getting <80ms response times consistently. And I'm certain there are ways that we can shave this down further.
- dexterdog 11y agoI get sub-100ms times quite often for light calls. The 'boot-up' call will always be longer, but that's because the service had gone idle. If you are getting heavy usage that is not an issue.