3 ms·
> Linux has nothing to do with whatever reasons I think it is not about Linux in isolation, but about the fancy, over hyped tech stacks you see people using.
by TheAnimus 13y ago
> Linux has nothing to do with whatever reasons
I think it is not about Linux in isolation, but about the fancy, over hyped tech stacks you see people using.
About 6 months ago I was having a few days off, out in the wilderness so to speak, I decided to try this whole Go thing. When reading about it, I thought nice I like the actor paradigm, I was doing a prime solver from someone's tutorial, and... It was slow. Not slow, slow, but slow.
Compared the same thing to a similar idea in C# in Rx and in TPL, and in F# and in CamelLight, with one in Java.
For my preference the syntax of C# was the best, and funnily enough the old fashioned style implementation I did in Java was the fastest, but not by much at all. Go was about 20% of the speed of the java one, not much faster than the CamlLight implementation.
This wasn't scientific, this wasn't a fair comparison, but I am cynical about the 'buzz' or hype for some of these frameworks.
People often view things like Node.js as free. Which isn't true when you are paying for the hardware it runs on. The 'cost' of C# or MS SQL server isn't just the Microsoft licenses either. You can't look at these things solely in isolation.
However its rather un-interesting to say that a behemoth and status quo are actually good options. 'new' things are much more interesting, so get spoken about a lot more, but I'd love to know something truly high scale, highly available in Node.js, and how much it has really cost them.
- throwit1979 13y agoGo was about 20% of the speed of the java one You're probably doing something wrong. Go tops the techempower benchmarks for concurrent db access and page rendering, and for pure math performance, it has an average case performance of 17% slower than Java( highly dependent on problem chosen of course ) refs: http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/ http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/ http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?test=all&lang=go&lang2=java&data=u64q http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?t...
- pstuart 13y agoAnd that's with Go 1.1 vs. Java 6 or 7.
- TheAnimus 13y agoQuite, Go 1.1 wasn't released 6 months ago. People were reporting 20-40% performance improvements[1] in 1.1 so maybe it would be faster now. It is also certainly going to do with the fact I learn Java first some 13 years ago. C# some 8 years ago (I didn't care for it before it had generics / nullables, CamL 10 years ago etc. Plus I can't find the tutorial I was using to let people tell me how bad it is. The thing is, go back to something which was been hyped 6 months ago, as super-everything. You use it, and it isn't. Then 3 months later you see (unfairly!) the headline zomfg it's 40% faster, I can't help but feel 'meh', fool me once.... That said I will look at it again, its just today the tooling is certainly not as rich as I'd like, the libraries aren't there yet and I don't have the time to help make it better. I do like learning new languages, even if you go back to the older one, it often helps shape new thought processes, and whilst I really do try to think in the manner fitting for it, it is very possible I went in with the whole when you only use a hammer, everything looks like a nail approach. [1] - http://dave.cheney.net/2013/05/21/go-11-performance-improvements http://dave.cheney.net/2013/05/21/go-11-performance-improvem...