6 ms·

Too bad it is still slow as a glacier.

by sirstompsalot 11y ago

jbrooksuk 11y ago
Have you seen any benchmarks? Route and config caching is a huge improvement in 5.0
- sirstompsalot 11y ago
  Yes, I have seen 5.0 benchmarks and even run some boom tests myself (admittedly nothing in a terrible amount of depth). The one I can cite offhand is this one http://blog.a-way-out.net/blog/2015/03/27/php-framework-benchmark/ http://blog.a-way-out.net/blog/2015/03/27/php-framework-benc... I'd be happy if you could link the benchmarks you have seen that demonstrates performance increases.
romanovcode 11y ago
Probably not when it's running on HHVM, it has 100% integration with it.
fideloper 11y ago
This comment makes no sense. Well, it makes sense, but I don't believe it comes from someone who's really considered what they're saying. First, it's PHP. Same situation with Ruby and Python. All generally slow as a glacier (obvious exclusions being different implementations of said languages). Developers' focus on code speed is ridiculous (is that too strong a word?) due to relative inexpensiveness of "hardware" and the "fact" (yep, fact) that code is for building value. In most cases, that value is provided via an automated service. Speed of that automation is typically not critical (obvious exclusions being something like medical equipment or stock trading, or making people wait ridiculous seconds after clicking a button. Please don't Well Actually™ me to death with pedantry).
- sirstompsalot 11y ago
  Great response, and you make a great point - focus on coding speed is a great reason to choose Laravel. It's also hugely popular and now with it's LTS, it's going to be around for a while. For me personally, I was a ZF 1.x guy; when I started a new project I chose Laravel, and it was a dream - crazy zippy (compared to ZF). But as I started to do more with it, I started to need to reduce my feature set, implement performance "features" just to retain a measure of speed. Is 5.x faster than 4.x? Sure. Does it include batteries and the kitchen sink? You bet. Do I still prefer a faster framework like Phalcon and implement the features I miss myself? Damned skippy.
  - thethimble 11y ago
    We're doing 2k req/s with Laravel for one of our API services. In order to maintain ~150ms of latency, this takes us ~14 c3.2xlarge boxes in a load balanced environment. We've done a lot of tuning to squeeze this much out of the boxes (nginx + php fpm) but ultimately I feel pretty let down by laravel/php. ~150 req/s per c3.2xlarge box is very disappointing. I'm hoping to migrate off and go with something like Scala+Play or even Go perhaps.
    - sirstompsalot 11y ago
      Yeah, that's the same conclusion that I came to myself. In my past experience the bottleneck is almost always the database but throw in Laravel and it takes some serious hardware just to stay afloat. I recently started thinking about switching languages and like everyone I know I started with Node.js first. I found myself rapidly infuriated with it and decided to try out Go. I wrote a quick S3 upload demo app just to grok it and I was thrilled with the results. Scala outperforms Go but I like Go a little more for rapid app dev. If you decide to take the plunge do let us know how it goes!
    - fideloper 11y ago
      Hey, that's really interesting! Is that laravel specific or is that general with PHP (frameworks) in general? Would love to know more about that and your setup/tuning. (Also wonder how well php7 will help that out). I think at that scale, it's certainly reasonable to try getting away from PHP.
    - lawry 11y ago
      I'm really glad to see I'm not the only one that feels the performance drop is painful, nowadays the only thing I do backend are API's, thus a lot of the features (like blade) are superfluous to me. I hope Lumen will kind of fix this, and be the perfect go-to framework for API's done in PHP. Having said that, looking at the future it would make a lot more sense to switch to a different language altogether, it's a same my current employer only wants to run php backend (because it's 1 command to install, I know bad reason, but they don't want to support other languages). Why exactly are you looking at Scala or Go? I kind of get Scala (but I'd personally rather opt for Clojure), but why Go? Purely because it's much more performant than php? Doesn't this has to do with the lacking of such a full-featured framework like laravel?
- spronkey 11y ago
  For any nontrivial service that wants to build a large audience, something with the glacial performance of Laravel (and I use Laravel, so I'm not completely knocking it) has the downside that things you would normally do when much more mature crop up earlier. Like having to worry about horizontal scaling, or rewriting parts of your app in another language. I'm not quite sure where L5's performance gets sunk so badly, but it really is a lot slower than earlier variants of the framework. About the only thing slower is Rails, really! ... and unlike Rails, Laravel hasn't had the stability and ecosystem to make those things really easy. Hopefully this LTS plan will change that a wee bit, but we'll see.

Too bad it is still slow as a glacier.

jbrooksuk 11y ago

Have you seen any benchmarks? Route and config caching is a huge improvement in 5.0

sirstompsalot 11y ago
Yes, I have seen 5.0 benchmarks and even run some boom tests myself (admittedly nothing in a terrible amount of depth). The one I can cite offhand is this one http://blog.a-way-out.net/blog/2015/03/27/php-framework-benchmark/ http://blog.a-way-out.net/blog/2015/03/27/php-framework-benc... I'd be happy if you could link the benchmarks you have seen that demonstrates performance increases.

romanovcode 11y ago

Probably not when it's running on HHVM, it has 100% integration with it.

fideloper 11y ago

This comment makes no sense. Well, it makes sense, but I don't believe it comes from someone who's really considered what they're saying. First, it's PHP. Same situation with Ruby and Python. All generally slow as a glacier (obvious exclusions being different implementations of said languages). Developers' focus on code speed is ridiculous (is that too strong a word?) due to relative inexpensiveness of "hardware" and the "fact" (yep, fact) that code is for building value. In most cases, that value is provided via an automated service. Speed of that automation is typically not critical (obvious exclusions being something like medical equipment or stock trading, or making people wait ridiculous seconds after clicking a button. Please don't Well Actually™ me to death with pedantry).

sirstompsalot 11y ago
Great response, and you make a great point - focus on coding speed is a great reason to choose Laravel. It's also hugely popular and now with it's LTS, it's going to be around for a while. For me personally, I was a ZF 1.x guy; when I started a new project I chose Laravel, and it was a dream - crazy zippy (compared to ZF). But as I started to do more with it, I started to need to reduce my feature set, implement performance "features" just to retain a measure of speed. Is 5.x faster than 4.x? Sure. Does it include batteries and the kitchen sink? You bet. Do I still prefer a faster framework like Phalcon and implement the features I miss myself? Damned skippy.
- thethimble 11y ago
  We're doing 2k req/s with Laravel for one of our API services. In order to maintain ~150ms of latency, this takes us ~14 c3.2xlarge boxes in a load balanced environment. We've done a lot of tuning to squeeze this much out of the boxes (nginx + php fpm) but ultimately I feel pretty let down by laravel/php. ~150 req/s per c3.2xlarge box is very disappointing. I'm hoping to migrate off and go with something like Scala+Play or even Go perhaps.
  - sirstompsalot 11y ago
    Yeah, that's the same conclusion that I came to myself. In my past experience the bottleneck is almost always the database but throw in Laravel and it takes some serious hardware just to stay afloat. I recently started thinking about switching languages and like everyone I know I started with Node.js first. I found myself rapidly infuriated with it and decided to try out Go. I wrote a quick S3 upload demo app just to grok it and I was thrilled with the results. Scala outperforms Go but I like Go a little more for rapid app dev. If you decide to take the plunge do let us know how it goes!
  - fideloper 11y ago
    Hey, that's really interesting! Is that laravel specific or is that general with PHP (frameworks) in general? Would love to know more about that and your setup/tuning. (Also wonder how well php7 will help that out). I think at that scale, it's certainly reasonable to try getting away from PHP.
  - lawry 11y ago
    I'm really glad to see I'm not the only one that feels the performance drop is painful, nowadays the only thing I do backend are API's, thus a lot of the features (like blade) are superfluous to me. I hope Lumen will kind of fix this, and be the perfect go-to framework for API's done in PHP. Having said that, looking at the future it would make a lot more sense to switch to a different language altogether, it's a same my current employer only wants to run php backend (because it's 1 command to install, I know bad reason, but they don't want to support other languages). Why exactly are you looking at Scala or Go? I kind of get Scala (but I'd personally rather opt for Clojure), but why Go? Purely because it's much more performant than php? Doesn't this has to do with the lacking of such a full-featured framework like laravel?
spronkey 11y ago
For any nontrivial service that wants to build a large audience, something with the glacial performance of Laravel (and I use Laravel, so I'm not completely knocking it) has the downside that things you would normally do when much more mature crop up earlier. Like having to worry about horizontal scaling, or rewriting parts of your app in another language. I'm not quite sure where L5's performance gets sunk so badly, but it really is a lot slower than earlier variants of the framework. About the only thing slower is Rails, really! ... and unlike Rails, Laravel hasn't had the stability and ecosystem to make those things really easy. Hopefully this LTS plan will change that a wee bit, but we'll see.