3 ms·
They already do, in the sense that you'll need beefier/more machines to do the same job. Of course, using Python means you have a lot of low-hanging fruit to p
by eastern 8y ago
They already do, in the sense that you'll need beefier/more machines to do the same job.
Of course, using Python means you have a lot of low-hanging fruit to pick. We have a Python service where we moved ONE ~60 line recursive function to Go and overall CPU consumption dropped to 15-20% of what it used to be.
- monkeyshelli 8y agoThat sounds pretty damn nice - would you happen to have a good link in mind for reading more on the subject?
- makapuf 8y agoWhat's interesting is also how go and python interaction is since you seem to be able to call go from python and the reverse very efficiently.
- eastern 8y agoSorry but we actually cheated on that part. Redid the page so that the function that is now in Go is a separate little service that is called via ajax directly by the users' browsers. So there's no actual Python-Go interaction in our code. This was quicker, cleaner and has made the page more responsive for users.
- makapuf 8y agoThanks this comment is useful, client side integration is integration after all, and I think if it was simple, you would have it done differently (if I understand your words correctly - "cheating").
- eastern 8y agoThis was a financial function which calculated an internal return of return for a long series of uneven cash flows, essentially a python implementation of the XIRR function that spreadsheets have. To get to the required two decimal places of precision, each call would recurse 50-60 or more times so this was more or less all that the server was doing. A VERY low hanging fruit.