3 ms·
Sounds like you were using runserver in Django and comparing its performance to WSGI's like gunicorn and uwsgi. That is an unfair comparison. Up to 200 ms for a
by sgt 5y ago
Sounds like you were using runserver in Django and comparing its performance to WSGI's like gunicorn and uwsgi. That is an unfair comparison. Up to 200 ms for a hello-world response time even with runserver shouldn't happen. Perhaps you should try again?
- junon 5y agoNo thanks, Django was a complicated mess, and Python is, in my opinion, not at all suited for long-running services in production. There are a plethora of other languages for that. Seems like you're close to, or perhaps the creator of, the project - nothing against you or the team. I just don't have a lot of positive things to say about Django after having worked with it.
- sgt 5y agoNot affiliated with Django at all. I just use it for a few production apps, although they are not exactly high traffic. I have a high traffic product in use, but the backend is written in Java w/ Undertow. What I enjoy about Python is that it's great at getting stuff and ideas out quickly. In fact, I just added a new feature tonight to a Django project and that took me ~45 min for something that would likely take 3 hrs to implement in Java.
- anaganisk 5y agoYeah, Instagram like sites need to built with rust, using a react app, oh wait no it was built on top of python and Django, yet somehow they became successful. That says a lot about how much it can pull to, may be you expected something thats not intended for Django to do?