3 ms·

You need to look at the average reply rate instead of the request rate. Requests/sec can be misleading. The replies / sec tell quite a different story. Here

You need to look at the average reply rate instead of the request rate. Requests/sec can be misleading. The replies / sec tell quite a different story. Here they are for pong: Rails Webrick: 153.9 Rails Thin: 33.3 Rails Mongrel: 90.7 Rails JRuby (glassfish): 3,350 JRuby Mongrel: 31.3 Snap: 11,309 Play: 19,796

rufugee 16y ago
You're absolutely correct. Sorry. Here it is, updated properly: Test Pong: | Rails Webrick | Rails Mongrel | Rails Thin | Rails JRuby (glassfish) | Snap | Play! | | 153.9 | 90.7 | 33.3 | 3350.5 | 11309.5 | 19796.3 | Test File: | Rails Webrick | Rails Mongrel | Rails Thin | Rails JRuby (glassfish) | Snap | Play! | | Didn't test | 179.9 | 758.0 | 6146.9 | memory leak | 1617.9 |
- barmstrong 16y ago
  Didn't realize Glassfish was that fast. Thanks. And hadn't heard of Play! Will check into that. Also, just as a counterpoint to all this - as PG pointed out in his book, with Moore's law, speed of execution is no longer the limiting factor in most software development. It is programmer time and productivity, where (I'm guessing) Rails still wins this test. I'd expect that to be an ongoing trend. But of course speed of execution is still necessary in special situations, so this is still valuable.
  - cx01 16y ago
    I think Play+Scala should be competitive with Rails in expressiveness, while still being a lot faster. Of course, if you prefer dynamic typing you might disagree with me here.
    - rufugee 16y ago
      Personally, I've found it's very expressive and easy to follow, although I'm using Java play. And having reliable autocomplete and ctrl+click navigation is something I really missed in Rails, but have in Play.
jroes 16y ago
Surprising that Webrick is faster than Thin and Mongrel. How can this be?

rufugee 16y ago

barmstrong 16y ago
Didn't realize Glassfish was that fast. Thanks. And hadn't heard of Play! Will check into that. Also, just as a counterpoint to all this - as PG pointed out in his book, with Moore's law, speed of execution is no longer the limiting factor in most software development. It is programmer time and productivity, where (I'm guessing) Rails still wins this test. I'd expect that to be an ongoing trend. But of course speed of execution is still necessary in special situations, so this is still valuable.
- cx01 16y ago
  I think Play+Scala should be competitive with Rails in expressiveness, while still being a lot faster. Of course, if you prefer dynamic typing you might disagree with me here.
  - rufugee 16y ago
    Personally, I've found it's very expressive and easy to follow, although I'm using Java play. And having reliable autocomplete and ctrl+click navigation is something I really missed in Rails, but have in Play.

jroes 16y ago

Surprising that Webrick is faster than Thin and Mongrel. How can this be?