4 ms·
The language has nothing to do with it, this site could be ran on a $5/mo droplet (or a pair of them for their deployment strategy).
by altdatathrow 6y ago
The language has nothing to do with it, this site could be ran on a $5/mo droplet (or a pair of them for their deployment strategy).
- kumarvvr 6y agoWouldn't the same app, written in Python & C#, have different throughput on the same hardware?
- throwawaythekey 6y agoYes, but a python app can be efficient enough to serve that many users on the smallest size droplet. Any additional speed gains would only be useful for scaling and MAYBE latency.
- kumarvvr 6y agoSo you agree that throughput would be different. Sure, a Python app can be efficient to serve 55k users. But scaling it to a million users, say. A python app would consume way more resources than an app in C#
- aembleton 6y agoUse whichever language you're most comfortable with. You can always add more hardware to the problem; and if you get really big then hire people to start re-writing parts of it.
- throwawaythekey 6y agoI don't think any would argue that python is the fastest language. The more pertinent/practical point for most though is not to needlessly overbuild whether it be in dev time or servers. Realistically, the author could probably serve 10x-100x more users (your million users) and still stay on the cheapest droplet with python. As you can't go smaller than the smallest, changing language can't be justified on a cost basis. Finally, the performance differences between a well written python app and a poorly written c# app are probably not that large. The developer probably started with python, because that's what they know, and wouldn't be able to match the code quality in c# without significant effort.