3 ms·

Actually uWebSockets and uSockets will perform better than this (2x at least in my local tests), I need to do a lot of copying, instancing and crossing Python G

Actually uWebSockets and uSockets will perform better than this (2x at least in my local tests), I need to do a lot of copying, instancing and crossing Python GIL. Yeah this test basically shows that Python backed by uWS is crazy fast, but is not an direct comparison to uWS to Go. This test is just an troughput test, with is very useful to measure raw performance. More tools like caching tools, a better database client etc is need to construct an complete scenario, and i'm working on it! (Maybe in 1 week or 2 weeks will be done) https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=124fd2af-3030-4315-8876-e1db1fa91193&test=plaintext&l=hra0hr-35r https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=1...

FpUser 4y ago
>"Python backed by uWS is crazy fast, but is not an direct comparison to uWS to Go." Correction. It shows that uWS is crazy fast. Sure if python us used as a thin glue between something like "select username from user" and uWS or send file over uWS then the result is fast. Do something meaningful in Python itself an it will be slow. This is not to diminish your work. Python is mostly glue anyways so in average the end result should be quite ok
- cirospaciari 4y ago
  I see your comment as positive <3 the whole purpose of this framework is to offer better glue, to Python for Web
  - FpUser 4y ago
    >"I see your comment as positive" It is positive. You've created very nice "Web Python". No arguments here.
    - cirospaciari 4y ago
      thank you.