4 ms·

This looks good. However according to the web framework benchmark its performance looks pretty underwhelming, below that of Python and Ruby: http://www.techemp

This looks good. However according to the web framework benchmark its performance looks pretty underwhelming, below that of Python and Ruby: http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r6&hw=i7&test=json http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r6&hw=i7... Has anyone used this in production?

dom96 13y ago
Hey, guy behind Jester here (The web framework being benchmarked). Please don't let these results deter you from Nimrod. Not only is Jester alpha-grade software, but when I submitted these benchmarks I did not have much time to properly utilize Nimrod's concurrency features (I was in the middle of exams). My first submission was not parallel at all and I quickly corrected it so that multiple processes were simply spawned (with no regard to the amount of CPU cores) which is definitely not ideal and the results show this. So please don't blame Nimrod for this, blame me instead. For better evidence of Nimrod's power take a look at these benchmarks: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-tw...
- bhauer 13y ago
  Hi dom96. Thanks again for contributing the Jester tests! I hope you get some time to continue your work on Jester. We'd like to have Nimrod represented properly in the results. Are there other Nimrod web frameworks (and importantly, domain experts with those frameworks) that could be contributed for Round 7?
  - dom96 13y ago
    No problem! Thanks for accepting my contributions! I hope so too, but maybe with Nimrod's recent surge in popularity someone can give me a hand :) Sadly, I am not aware of any other web frameworks. Speaking of Round 7, do you have an ETA for it?
    - bhauer 13y ago
      Not yet, we've been busy with other projects. But I want us to aim for mid-September.
ryeguy 13y ago
This benchmark [1], which was just on HN a couple days ago, puts nimrod at 96% the performance of C++. 1: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-tw...
comicjk 13y ago
I'm in scientific computing so the floating-point performance is by far my biggest concern. In the tests I just ran, Nimrod and C are virtually identical in time (probably creating near-identical machine code). test.nim: var sum = 1.0 while sum<1.0e10: sum = sum*1.00000001 echo($sum) test.c: #include <stdio.h> int main() { double sum = 1.0; while(sum < 1e10) { sum *= 1.00000001; } printf("%f\n", sum); return 0; } C time / Nimrod time, average of 10 runs: 1.00
- rdtsc 13y ago
  Perhaps unrelated. What are you thoughts so far on Julia? http://julialang.org/ http://julialang.org/
  - comicjk 13y ago
    I've checked it out on your recommendation. I like the syntax even better than Nimrod's, it has better support for scientific work, and the floating-point performance is virtually identical. The only problem is that global variables are apparently not allowed to be typed as plain primitives, so this program: s = 1.0 while s<1.0e10 s = s*1.00000001 end println(s) Has mysteriously terrible performance. You have to use: function test() s = 1.0 while s<1.0e10 s = s*1.00000001 end println(s) end test() to see what Julia can really do.

dom96 13y ago

Hey, guy behind Jester here (The web framework being benchmarked). Please don't let these results deter you from Nimrod. Not only is Jester alpha-grade software, but when I submitted these benchmarks I did not have much time to properly utilize Nimrod's concurrency features (I was in the middle of exams). My first submission was not parallel at all and I quickly corrected it so that multiple processes were simply spawned (with no regard to the amount of CPU cores) which is definitely not ideal and the results show this. So please don't blame Nimrod for this, blame me instead. For better evidence of Nimrod's power take a look at these benchmarks: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-tw...

bhauer 13y ago
Hi dom96. Thanks again for contributing the Jester tests! I hope you get some time to continue your work on Jester. We'd like to have Nimrod represented properly in the results. Are there other Nimrod web frameworks (and importantly, domain experts with those frameworks) that could be contributed for Round 7?
- dom96 13y ago
  No problem! Thanks for accepting my contributions! I hope so too, but maybe with Nimrod's recent surge in popularity someone can give me a hand :) Sadly, I am not aware of any other web frameworks. Speaking of Round 7, do you have an ETA for it?
  - bhauer 13y ago
    Not yet, we've been busy with other projects. But I want us to aim for mid-September.

ryeguy 13y ago

This benchmark [1], which was just on HN a couple days ago, puts nimrod at 96% the performance of C++. 1: http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-two-parallel-go-rust-d-scala-and-nimrod/ http://togototo.wordpress.com/2013/08/23/benchmarks-round-tw...

comicjk 13y ago

I'm in scientific computing so the floating-point performance is by far my biggest concern. In the tests I just ran, Nimrod and C are virtually identical in time (probably creating near-identical machine code). test.nim: var sum = 1.0 while sum<1.0e10: sum = sum*1.00000001 echo($sum) test.c: #include <stdio.h> int main() { double sum = 1.0; while(sum < 1e10) { sum *= 1.00000001; } printf("%f\n", sum); return 0; } C time / Nimrod time, average of 10 runs: 1.00

rdtsc 13y ago
Perhaps unrelated. What are you thoughts so far on Julia? http://julialang.org/ http://julialang.org/
- comicjk 13y ago
  I've checked it out on your recommendation. I like the syntax even better than Nimrod's, it has better support for scientific work, and the floating-point performance is virtually identical. The only problem is that global variables are apparently not allowed to be typed as plain primitives, so this program: s = 1.0 while s<1.0e10 s = s*1.00000001 end println(s) Has mysteriously terrible performance. You have to use: function test() s = 1.0 while s<1.0e10 s = s*1.00000001 end println(s) end test() to see what Julia can really do.