5 ms·
I do remember that a straightforward C++ rewrite of Cassandra performed ~10 times better. I imagine that a Go implementation would be orders of magnitude less
by lngnmn 10y ago
I do remember that a straightforward C++ rewrite of Cassandra performed ~10 times better.
I imagine that a Go implementation would be orders of magnitude less lines of code, resource usage and tree-four times more performant.
- valarauca1 10y agoGo doesn't use less resources then Java (Source: Google [1]). Go is only marginally ~10% faster then Java [2] [1] https://days2011.scala-lang.org/sites/days2011/files/ws3-1-Hundt.pdf https://days2011.scala-lang.org/sites/days2011/files/ws3-1-H... [2] https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/go.html https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/go.html
- lngnmn 10y ago> Go doesn't use less resources then Java It obviously does. Java's strings and other objects representation, JNI coersions, necessary copying of buffers, common aliasing bugs in code which affects GC, bloatware of dependencies, etc, etc. Knowledge of some principles protects one from being distracted by noise.
- magic_quotes 10y ago> common aliasing bugs in code which affects GC Care to elaborate?
- geodel 10y agoYour second link shows Java used about 1.7 to 30 times more memory than Go.
- igouy 10y ago> Go doesn't use less resources then Java You point to measurements [2] that show Go programs (for tasks that need memory to be allocated -- reverse-complement, regex-dna, k-nucleotide, binary-trees) using 2-3x less memory!