3 ms·

Finally something that comes close to Dart tools, or it reminds me a lot of it. Does "deno install" behave like pnpm with the way it handles node_modules effic

Finally something that comes close to Dart tools, or it reminds me a lot of it. Does "deno install" behave like pnpm with the way it handles node_modules efficiently? Also, is there any summary of the Deno 2 presentation? 1 hour is a bit too much to take in. It's almost like a movie. The site presents Deno 2 as if it has finally beat Bun in terms of performance, is that the case? Either case, I downloaded Deno 2 from asdf and I'll give it a try, looks exciting!

pier25 2y ago
> 1 hour is a bit too much to take in. It's almost like a movie It's more like 20 mins. There's a general intro of like 10 mins on Deno and then like 30 mins of a livestream with the Deno team.
Jarred 2y ago
> The site presents Deno 2 as if it has finally beat Bun in terms of performance Bun's HTTP server performs 51% faster before parallelism. Their benchmark is incorrect. They posted a correction, and their correction is also incorrect. Benchmarking correctly is hard, and we put a lot of effort into making sure our benchmarks are easily reproducible. Bun v1.1.30: 283,386 requests per second (51% faster) Deno v2.0.0: 187,359 requests per second Deno v1.45.5: 185,522 requests per second The following code: let i = 0; export default { async fetch(request: Request): Promise<Response> { return new Response(`Hello, world! ${i++}`); }, }; Run with: oha -c 10 -n 10000000 --disable-compression http://localhost:{port} This was tested on a Linux x64 machine running Debian 11 with a 32 core Intel i9-13900 CPU and 64GB of RAM. In this benchmark, the HTTP server runs on a single thread, so the CPU core count is not as relevant but still worth mentioning. If we increase the number of concurrent connections from 10 to 1,000 - Bun's HTTP server performs 267% faster. Bun v1.1.30: 209,133 requests per second (267% faster) Deno v2.0.0: 78,289 requests per second Deno v1.45.5: 76,628 requests per second Run with: oha -c 1000 -n 10000000 --disable-compression http://localhost:{port} Note that we add the --disable-compression for Deno's benefit here (as it does nothing for Bun right now) Have not yet spent enough time investigating their other benchmarks.
- Alifatisk 2y ago
  Thank you for the input Jarred! I felt something wasn't right.

pier25 2y ago

> 1 hour is a bit too much to take in. It's almost like a movie It's more like 20 mins. There's a general intro of like 10 mins on Deno and then like 30 mins of a livestream with the Deno team.

Jarred 2y ago

> The site presents Deno 2 as if it has finally beat Bun in terms of performance Bun's HTTP server performs 51% faster before parallelism. Their benchmark is incorrect. They posted a correction, and their correction is also incorrect. Benchmarking correctly is hard, and we put a lot of effort into making sure our benchmarks are easily reproducible. Bun v1.1.30: 283,386 requests per second (51% faster) Deno v2.0.0: 187,359 requests per second Deno v1.45.5: 185,522 requests per second The following code: let i = 0; export default { async fetch(request: Request): Promise<Response> { return new Response(`Hello, world! ${i++}`); }, }; Run with: oha -c 10 -n 10000000 --disable-compression http://localhost:{port} This was tested on a Linux x64 machine running Debian 11 with a 32 core Intel i9-13900 CPU and 64GB of RAM. In this benchmark, the HTTP server runs on a single thread, so the CPU core count is not as relevant but still worth mentioning. If we increase the number of concurrent connections from 10 to 1,000 - Bun's HTTP server performs 267% faster. Bun v1.1.30: 209,133 requests per second (267% faster) Deno v2.0.0: 78,289 requests per second Deno v1.45.5: 76,628 requests per second Run with: oha -c 1000 -n 10000000 --disable-compression http://localhost:{port} Note that we add the --disable-compression for Deno's benefit here (as it does nothing for Bun right now) Have not yet spent enough time investigating their other benchmarks.

Alifatisk 2y ago
Thank you for the input Jarred! I felt something wasn't right.