4 ms·
Except when you look at benchmarks it's actually not that much faster than rails. https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21&hw=ph&test=query htt
by DoesntMatter22 3y ago
Except when you look at benchmarks it's actually not that much faster than rails.
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21&hw=ph&test=query https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21&hw=...
- andrewmutz 3y agoI don't know how they measure it, but other measurements have shown different results: https://medium.com/@elviovicosa/phoenix-vs-rails-benchmark-2019-f0e68336d557 https://medium.com/@elviovicosa/phoenix-vs-rails-benchmark-2...
- nickjj 3y ago> I don't know how they measure it, but other measurements have shown different results The big difference is the blog post you linked performs a very basic GET request to an endpoint. It mentions it doesn't hit the database or deal with caching. It's basically a non-realistic hello world that is good at isolating performance of a specific library but doesn't show how it fits into the grand scheme of things. The other link performs multiple database queries as part of the request which goes back to the old saying that for a huge portion of web apps you're I/O bound (AKA waiting for something else such as the database).