Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Catalyst: Users

Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off

 

 

Catalyst users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


orasnita at gmail

Jan 14, 2007, 7:26 AM

Post #1 of 30 (5399 views)
Permalink
Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off

Hi,

Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
with other frameworks?
http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails

Octavian


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


brian.kirkbride at deeperbydesign

Jan 14, 2007, 7:55 AM

Post #2 of 30 (5307 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Octavian Rasnita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow
> comparing with other frameworks?
> http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails
>
> Octavian
>
>


See the exhaustive thread in which this was discussed earlier:

http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/msg02329.html

Perhaps a quick archive search can answer your next question faster than I can.

Cheers,
Brian

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


zzbbyy at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 12:12 AM

Post #3 of 30 (5304 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

I remember the discussion here - but it seems that nobody tried to
independently verify the results. I did compare Rails and Catalyst
and on my pretty standard Debian box Catalyst was about 50% faster
than Rails.

--
Zbyszek

On 1/14/07, Octavian Rasnita <orasnita [at] gmail> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
> with other frameworks?
> http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails
>
> Octavian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst [at] lists
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>


--
Zbigniew Lukasiak
http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


catalyst at fadetoblack

Jan 15, 2007, 1:21 AM

Post #4 of 30 (5299 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

> Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
> with other frameworks?

Does it matter?

If speed is so important, you should write your own custom httpd that does
exactly what you need in assembly language.

Carl


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


Leandro.Hermida at fmi

Jan 15, 2007, 1:29 AM

Post #5 of 30 (5297 views)
Permalink
RE: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

> From: Carl Johnstone [mailto:catalyst [at] fadetoblack]
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 10:21
> To: catalyst [at] lists
> Subject: Re: [Catalyst] Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off
>
>
> > Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing with other frameworks?
>
> Does it matter?
>
> If speed is so important, you should write your own custom
> httpd that does exactly what you need in assembly language.
>
> Carl

Speed does matter and I believe the original thread question is a valid
one. Not everyone has the time or the know-how to do wheel reinvention
and write custom daemons (I know I don't). That's why people write
kernels and libraries and abstraction of lower level things so that
others can build things on top. Otherwise we would never get anything
done.


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


orasnita at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 2:11 AM

Post #6 of 30 (5317 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

From: "Carl Johnstone" <catalyst [at] fadetoblack>

>
>> Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
>> with other frameworks?
>
> Does it matter?

Of course it does.

> If speed is so important, you should write your own custom httpd that does
> exactly what you need in assembly language.

It is too hard to write it in assembly, but it could be more easy to use
Ruby on Rails instead if RoR is really faster.
That's why I have asked.

Now to say the truth, I won't use RoR because I don't know Ruby, but I want
to know which are the advantages and disadvantages of Catalyst comparing
with other frameworks.

Octavian


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


danielmcbrearty at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 2:24 AM

Post #7 of 30 (5284 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

you honestly can't come to much of a conclusion about a test that
just hits the docroot over and over again, and sees how many
connections per second happen as a result. The test may say that one
aprticular aspect of RoR is quicker ... but it's not an aspect that
has a huge impact, given that the speed of most apps is affected by
what happens in the db layer.

After all, if you wanted you app to do this, you would just apache
serving a static file :-)\


Also, I noted that perrin's comment about using the -r option for
dprof hasn't been answered - maybe there was something else altogether
going on.


On 1/15/07, Octavian Rasnita <orasnita [at] gmail> wrote:
> From: "Carl Johnstone" <catalyst [at] fadetoblack>
>
> >
> >> Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
> >> with other frameworks?
> >
> > Does it matter?
>
> Of course it does.
>
> > If speed is so important, you should write your own custom httpd that does
> > exactly what you need in assembly language.
>
> It is too hard to write it in assembly, but it could be more easy to use
> Ruby on Rails instead if RoR is really faster.
> That's why I have asked.
>
> Now to say the truth, I won't use RoR because I don't know Ruby, but I want
> to know which are the advantages and disadvantages of Catalyst comparing
> with other frameworks.
>
> Octavian
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst [at] lists
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>


--
Daniel McBrearty
email : danielmcbrearty at gmail.com
www.engoi.com : the multi - language vocab trainer
BTW : 0873928131

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


rs at 474

Jan 15, 2007, 2:35 AM

Post #8 of 30 (5290 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Octavian Rasnita wrote:

> Now to say the truth, I won't use RoR because I don't know Ruby, but I
> want to know which are the advantages and disadvantages of Catalyst
> comparing with other frameworks.

To summarize (again): The benchmark doesn't benchmark Catalyst, only
it's dispatcher (and as I see it from the site and tarball, TT) and the
way it does it hasn't even anything to do with dispatching in real
applications.

I never used RoR, but as I understood it, it's dispatching facilities
are no way near those of Catalyst.

--
# Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek
# Perl 5/Catalyst Developer in Hamburg, Germany
{ EMail => ' rs [at] 474 ', Web => ' http://474.at ' }

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


catalyst at fadetoblack

Jan 15, 2007, 4:10 AM

Post #9 of 30 (5290 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

>>>>> Leandro Hermida >>>>>
Speed does matter and I believe the original thread question is a valid
one. Not everyone has the time or the know-how to do wheel reinvention
and write custom daemons (I know I don't). That's why people write
kernels and libraries and abstraction of lower level things so that
others can build things on top. Otherwise we would never get anything
done.
<<<<< <<<<<

So here you're saying that getting things done is more important than pure
speed?

So surely you pick the framework that most helps you get things done rather
than the one that works fastest?

Carl




_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


pagaltzis at gmx

Jan 15, 2007, 4:19 AM

Post #10 of 30 (5289 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

* Carl Johnstone <catalyst [at] fadetoblack> [2007-01-15 13:15]:
> So surely you pick the framework that most helps you get things
> done rather than the one that works fastest?

Yes and no. Depends on what you’re doing. But in the case of
Catalyst, you’ll probably get much more speed out of switching
to another templating engine and/or ORM than out of switching
the framework, whose total performance impact is negligible. So
I don’t know what the point of benchmarking frameworks against
each other is, particularly for such an unrepresentative case.

Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


peter at dragonstaff

Jan 15, 2007, 4:26 AM

Post #11 of 30 (5301 views)
Permalink
Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

For businesses the cost-to-develop and cost-to-maintain are usually more
important than handler performance.
The reason is that in most medium-large transactional web systems the
bottleneck is the database and not the framework.
A 10-100x slowdown in using an ORM or your framework of choice doesn't make
much difference in terms of end user perceived speed (assuming you serve
static content from a lightweight proxy web server). It does save a lot of
money in cost-to-maintain.

Sure there is a place for optimised libraries and so on, but it's only worth
optimising bottlenecks and the handler usually isn't one.
I recently had to hand-write a TCP/IP server in Perl using POE to handle one
particularly heavy case but most situations are easily dealt with by Apache
mod_perl or FastCGI, in fact running Perl in CGI mode is often adequate.

More important questions to me about frameworks are how:
- easy to learn
- quick to develop
- flexible
- comprehensive in terms of supporting infrastructure (templates,
components)
- easy/expensive to recruit staff
- easy to integrate with other systems

Realistic approaches include
.NET
J2EE
Catalyst, Jifty
RoR

They all have strengths/weaknesses.
For example, you'll get a Jifty or RoR app up quickly if you do it the
standard way. If you want to build a bigger system that doesn't quite fit
their model you're probably better off with Catalyst or another framework.
I did one large system with Catalyst last year and it was great for that.
I did a smaller system just before Christmas and wrote my own simple MVC
framework for convenience.
It's a question of choosing the right tool for the job.

Regards,
Peter Edwards
www.dragonstaff.com Business IT Consultancy
-----Original Message-----
From: Hermida, Leandro [mailto:Leandro.Hermida [at] fmi]
Sent: 15 January 2007 09:30
To: The elegant MVC web framework
Subject: RE: [Catalyst] Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off


> From: Carl Johnstone [mailto:catalyst [at] fadetoblack]
> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2007 10:21
> To: catalyst [at] lists
> Subject: Re: [Catalyst] Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off
>
>
> > Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing with other frameworks?
>
> Does it matter?
>
> If speed is so important, you should write your own custom
> httpd that does exactly what you need in assembly language.
>
> Carl

Speed does matter and I believe the original thread question is a valid
one. Not everyone has the time or the know-how to do wheel reinvention
and write custom daemons (I know I don't). That's why people write
kernels and libraries and abstraction of lower level things so that
others can build things on top. Otherwise we would never get anything
done.





_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


catalyst at fadetoblack

Jan 15, 2007, 4:28 AM

Post #12 of 30 (5288 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

> Now to say the truth, I won't use RoR because I don't know Ruby, but I
> want to know which are the advantages and disadvantages of Catalyst
> comparing with other frameworks.

The most important advantage/disadvantage *to you* must be that Catalyst is
Perl and you know that, and RoR is Ruby and you don't know that. So it
becomes more about Ruby vs Perl than Catalyst vs Rails.

It's also entirely personal to you, as you've got to factor in your desire
to learn Ruby.

Carl


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


orasnita at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 4:51 AM

Post #13 of 30 (5300 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

From: "Carl Johnstone" <catalyst [at] fadetoblack>

>> Now to say the truth, I won't use RoR because I don't know Ruby, but I
>> want to know which are the advantages and disadvantages of Catalyst
>> comparing with other frameworks.
>
> The most important advantage/disadvantage *to you* must be that Catalyst
> is Perl and you know that, and RoR is Ruby and you don't know that. So it
> becomes more about Ruby vs Perl than Catalyst vs Rails.
>
> It's also entirely personal to you, as you've got to factor in your desire
> to learn Ruby.
>
> Carl

I have seen fewer and fewer people start learning perl, and more become
interested about Python and Ruby (not mentioning those that like C#, Java,
C...).
They can say that their preferate language is better, that it is newer and
that it took what's the best from perl and from other languages, that its
object orientation is better, that even though it doesn't have so many
libraries as perl does, they are better than those from perl, that the few
frameworks available for their language are faster than the frameworks that
work under perl, and so on.

I would like to say that it is not true, but I cannot see any benchmarks,
and I don't know those languages for beeing able to create them, and that's
why I would like to know.

Octavian


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


rs at 474

Jan 15, 2007, 5:18 AM

Post #14 of 30 (5295 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Octavian Rasnita wrote:

> I have seen fewer and fewer people start learning perl, and more become
> interested about Python and Ruby (not mentioning those that like C#,
> Java, C...).
> They can say that their preferate language is better, that it is newer
> and that it took what's the best from perl and from other languages,
> that its object orientation is better, that even though it doesn't have
> so many libraries as perl does, they are better than those from perl,
> that the few frameworks available for their language are faster than the
> frameworks that work under perl, and so on.
>
> I would like to say that it is not true, but I cannot see any
> benchmarks, and I don't know those languages for beeing able to create
> them, and that's why I would like to know.

In my experience, you can't prove anything to people who argue like "my
language is better." The real reason for them to say that Perl stinks
is, that most people say that Perl stinks.

I have given up on it. Tell it to the people who are able to listen and
don't waste your energy on the rest.

--
# Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek
# Perl 5/Catalyst Developer in Hamburg, Germany
{ EMail => ' rs [at] 474 ', Web => ' http://474.at ' }

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


perrin at elem

Jan 15, 2007, 7:52 AM

Post #15 of 30 (5291 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 11:35 +0100, Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek wrote:
> To summarize (again): The benchmark doesn't benchmark Catalyst, only
> it's dispatcher

I think it's a lame benchmark too, but isn't a dispatcher mostly what
Catalyst is? DBIx::Class and TT are not Catalyst, as people often
mention on the list.

- Perrin


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


perrin at elem

Jan 15, 2007, 8:28 AM

Post #16 of 30 (5305 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 14:51 +0200, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
> I would like to say that it is not true, but I cannot see any benchmarks

I don't think anyone disputes that Perl (and Python and Java) are much
faster than Ruby. You can find benchmarks showing that all over the
web. The RoR boosters are usually the ones on the defensive over
performance, saying that language performance doesn't matter because the
database is always the bottleneck (which I agree with, most of the
time). It would be very hard to justify choosing RoR for a project
based on performance.

- Perrin


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


orasnita at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 9:13 AM

Post #17 of 30 (5293 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

From: "Perrin Harkins" <perrin [at] elem>
> I don't think anyone disputes that Perl (and Python and Java) are much
> faster than Ruby. You can find benchmarks showing that all over the
> web. The RoR boosters are usually the ones on the defensive over
> performance, saying that language performance doesn't matter because the
> database is always the bottleneck (which I agree with, most of the
> time). It would be very hard to justify choosing RoR for a project
> based on performance.
>
> - Perrin

That's why I was curious and I have sent to the list that blog with the
comparison between RoR and Catalyst.

Octavian


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


acid06 at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 9:57 AM

Post #18 of 30 (5286 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On 1/15/07, Octavian Rasnita <orasnita [at] gmail> wrote:
> That's why I was curious and I have sent to the list that blog with the
> comparison between RoR and Catalyst.

You need to keep in mind that sometimes it's easier to optimize things
for benchmarks than for real world applications. That happens in
almost every field of computer technology: from video cards to web
development frameworks.

The only real way of comparing frameworks is to build a small (but
complex) application using each one of them. I honestly don't know if
Catalyst would perform better than the others but I think that if it
performs worse, it won't be by a large margin under these conditions.

Of course, no one wants to do that. People want to do quick and dirty
benchmarks (and, thus, get quick and dirty results). I wish I had
enough knowledge regarding RoR and Ruby so that I could perform a
proper benchmark but I don't even know if it supports things such as
chained actions which we take for granted when using Catalyst.

Leaving performance aside, I think Catalyst is probably the best web
framework out there feature-wise. And, for most people who have a
clue, that's usually what really matters.

-Nilson Santos F. Jr.

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


jon at jrock

Jan 15, 2007, 10:09 AM

Post #19 of 30 (5295 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On Sunday 14 January 2007 09:26, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow comparing
> with other frameworks?
> http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails

Rails can do nothing* faster than Catalyst. Good for it.

* Dispatch to an action that returns "Hello world."

Try adding a templating system and a database (it's an MVC framework after
all) and then see what the results look like.

--
package JAPH;use Catalyst qw/-Debug/;($;=JAPH)->config(name => do {
$,.=reverse qw[Jonathan tsu rehton lre rekca Rockway][$_].[split //,
";$;"]->[$_].q; ;for 1..4;$,=~s;^.;;;$,});$;->setup;

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


jon at jrock

Jan 15, 2007, 10:10 AM

Post #20 of 30 (5289 views)
Permalink
Re: Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On Monday 15 January 2007 06:19, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> I don’t know what the point of benchmarking frameworks against
> each other is, particularly for such an unrepresentative case.

Ad impressions.

--
package JAPH;use Catalyst qw/-Debug/;($;=JAPH)->config(name => do {
$,.=reverse qw[Jonathan tsu rehton lre rekca Rockway][$_].[split //,
";$;"]->[$_].q; ;for 1..4;$,=~s;^.;;;$,});$;->setup;

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


danielmcbrearty at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 11:25 AM

Post #21 of 30 (5281 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

they are not, but when you choose a framework you don't just choose a
dispatcher. You choose all the other design options that go with it.

On 1/15/07, Perrin Harkins <perrin [at] elem> wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 11:35 +0100, Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek wrote:
> > To summarize (again): The benchmark doesn't benchmark Catalyst, only
> > it's dispatcher
>
> I think it's a lame benchmark too, but isn't a dispatcher mostly what
> Catalyst is? DBIx::Class and TT are not Catalyst, as people often
> mention on the list.
>
> - Perrin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst [at] lists
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>


--
Daniel McBrearty
email : danielmcbrearty at gmail.com
www.engoi.com : the multi - language vocab trainer
BTW : 0873928131

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


danielmcbrearty at gmail

Jan 15, 2007, 11:27 AM

Post #22 of 30 (5292 views)
Permalink
Re: Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be meaningful if it was done
well. Not that anyone should choose their framework on the basis of
such a benchmark, but it's a factor to throw into the mix.


On 1/15/07, Jonathan Rockway <jon [at] jrock> wrote:
> On Monday 15 January 2007 06:19, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> > I don't know what the point of benchmarking frameworks against
> > each other is, particularly for such an unrepresentative case.
>
> Ad impressions.
>
> --
> package JAPH;use Catalyst qw/-Debug/;($;=JAPH)->config(name => do {
> $,.=reverse qw[Jonathan tsu rehton lre rekca Rockway][$_].[split //,
> ";$;"]->[$_].q; ;for 1..4;$,=~s;^.;;;$,});$;->setup;
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst [at] lists
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>


--
Daniel McBrearty
email : danielmcbrearty at gmail.com
www.engoi.com : the multi - language vocab trainer
BTW : 0873928131

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


rs at 474

Jan 16, 2007, 2:13 AM

Post #23 of 30 (5298 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Perrin Harkins wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 11:35 +0100, Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek wrote:
>> To summarize (again): The benchmark doesn't benchmark Catalyst, only
>> it's dispatcher
>
> I think it's a lame benchmark too, but isn't a dispatcher mostly what
> Catalyst is? DBIx::Class and TT are not Catalyst, as people often
> mention on the list.

I wouldn't say so. You can build applications that only use the
dispatcher of Catalyst, but the model interface, the view (not TT, just
the view classes), the plugin system, inherited actions, the config
system, action classes, etc. are pretty well used in most of my apps too.

--
# Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek
# Perl 5/Catalyst Developer in Hamburg, Germany
{ EMail => ' rs [at] 474 ', Web => ' http://474.at ' }

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


dbix-class at trout

Jan 16, 2007, 4:23 AM

Post #24 of 30 (5284 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

On 14 Jan 2007, at 15:26, Octavian Rasnita wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow
> comparing with other frameworks?
> http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails

Is it true that for incredibly trivial applications Catalyst might
serve less rps? Yes.

Have I ever seen a real-world scenario where the things this
benchmarks account for more than 0.1% of runtime? No.

We discussed this. Re-read the old discussion. Thread over :)

--
Matt S Trout, Technical Director, Shadowcat Systems Ltd.
Offering custom development, consultancy and support contracts for
Catalyst,
DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for
details.
+ Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix-
class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +



_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


perrin at elem

Jan 16, 2007, 5:59 AM

Post #25 of 30 (5295 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek wrote:
> Perrin Harkins wrote:
>> I think it's a lame benchmark too, but isn't a dispatcher mostly what
>> Catalyst is? DBIx::Class and TT are not Catalyst, as people often
>> mention on the list.
>
> I wouldn't say so. You can build applications that only use the
> dispatcher of Catalyst, but the model interface, the view (not TT, just
> the view classes), the plugin system, inherited actions, the config
> system, action classes, etc. are pretty well used in most of my apps too.

In the context of benchmarks, those things all seem pretty minimal to
me. The model interface is a razor-thin wrapper over calls to your ORM
of choice. There's not much reason to use it that I can see. Same with
the view: very little difference from calling templating tools directly.
(Somewhat more reason to use it though, since people often mess up the
caching in TT when they write their own calls to it.)

Most plugins don't do anything except pass your config to some module
and put a method in $c for something you could call directly. A few
specific plugins that contain some code do add real value -- session,
auth, pagecache -- and are frequently used, so I would consider them a
core part of Catalyst's functionality. Those would be fair game for a
benchmark.

Inherited actions and action classes are part of the dispatcher in a
broad sense (i.e. part of how URLs get mapped to methods).

The config system does provide convenient centralization but is mostly a
call to YAML or similar and won't contribute to runtime performance.

The biggest other thing that Catalyst itself provides is an abstraction
layer over runtime environments. That's a standard part of all modern
web framework, and shows up in any benchmark naturally.

The point being, saying that benchmarking the mapping of URLs to methods
isn't a good test of Catalyst is like saying that running SQL queries
isn't a good test of DBI. The bulk of the actual Catalyst code (not ORM
or templating) that will run on any request to a Catalyst app is the
dispatcher and the runtime environment abstraction. It's a *terrible*
test of the real-world performance of real web applications, which is
mostly about the database access and templates, but a good test of the
Catalyst code.

- Perrin

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


danielmcbrearty at gmail

Jan 16, 2007, 6:25 AM

Post #26 of 30 (1291 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

I looked for that discussion - didn't find it. Do you have a pointer?

In your experience, what is accounting for the other 99.9% fo runtime?
Db access? templates? other?

On 1/16/07, Matt S Trout <dbix-class [at] trout> wrote:
>
> On 14 Jan 2007, at 15:26, Octavian Rasnita wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Here is ablog I just found. Is it true that Catalyst is so slow
> > comparing with other frameworks?
> > http://letsgetdugg.com/category/rails
>
> Is it true that for incredibly trivial applications Catalyst might
> serve less rps? Yes.
>
> Have I ever seen a real-world scenario where the things this
> benchmarks account for more than 0.1% of runtime? No.
>
> We discussed this. Re-read the old discussion. Thread over :)
>
> --
> Matt S Trout, Technical Director, Shadowcat Systems Ltd.
> Offering custom development, consultancy and support contracts for
> Catalyst,
> DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for
> details.
> + Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix-
> class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst [at] lists
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
>


--
Daniel McBrearty
email : danielmcbrearty at gmail.com
www.engoi.com : the multi - language vocab trainer
BTW : 0873928131

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


rs at 474

Jan 16, 2007, 6:44 AM

Post #27 of 30 (1298 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

Perrin Harkins wrote:

> In the context of benchmarks, those things all seem pretty minimal to
> me. The model interface is a razor-thin wrapper over calls to your ORM
> of choice. There's not much reason to use it that I can see. Same with
> the view: very little difference from calling templating tools directly.
> (Somewhat more reason to use it though, since people often mess up the
> caching in TT when they write their own calls to it.)

It might be small pieces individually, but that can sum up. There seem
to be some talks about optimising the way uri_for works to make it
faster, so this doesn't seem to be that small of a value.

> Inherited actions and action classes are part of the dispatcher in a
> broad sense (i.e. part of how URLs get mapped to methods).

Well, in a _very_ broad sense IMHO ;) but no harm in differing here.

> The config system does provide convenient centralization but is mostly a
> call to YAML or similar and won't contribute to runtime performance.

Correct. This wasn't an argument that they do, rather one against
"Catalyst is only a fancy dispatcher," with which I still disagree.

> The point being, saying that benchmarking the mapping of URLs to methods
> isn't a good test of Catalyst is like saying that running SQL queries
> isn't a good test of DBI.

That's a rather odd comparison. I'd say "benchmarking mapping of URLs to
methods isn't a good test of Catalyst like benchmarking DBI isn't a good
test of DBIx-Class."

> The bulk of the actual Catalyst code (not ORM
> or templating) that will run on any request to a Catalyst app is the
> dispatcher and the runtime environment abstraction. It's a *terrible*
> test of the real-world performance of real web applications, which is
> mostly about the database access and templates, but a good test of the
> Catalyst code.

I'm not sure what definition you'd use for the word "test" here. With
some I can agree, with "benchmark against $X" I still have to disagree.
Sure, a benchmark once in a while can show you how things in Catalyst
got faster/slower. I'm just saying that you can't get a "X is faster
than Y" but only a "X is faster as Y in the way Z uses it" out of it.

--
# Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek
# Perl 5/Catalyst Developer in Hamburg, Germany
{ EMail => ' rs [at] 474 ', Web => ' http://474.at ' }

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


pagaltzis at gmx

Jan 16, 2007, 10:40 AM

Post #28 of 30 (1295 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

* Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek <rs [at] 474> [2007-01-16 15:55]:
> Perrin Harkins wrote:
> > The point being, saying that benchmarking the mapping of URLs
> > to methods isn't a good test of Catalyst is like saying that
> > running SQL queries isn't a good test of DBI.
>
> That's a rather odd comparison. I'd say "benchmarking mapping
> of URLs to methods isn't a good test of Catalyst like
> benchmarking DBI isn't a good test of DBIx-Class."

I agree that Perrin’s analogy was a bit odd, but yours is even
odder.

Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


rs at 474

Jan 17, 2007, 6:12 AM

Post #29 of 30 (1284 views)
Permalink
Re: Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

A. Pagaltzis said:
>
> * Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek <rs [at] 474> [2007-01-16 15:55]:
>
>> That's a rather odd comparison. I'd say "benchmarking mapping
>> of URLs to methods isn't a good test of Catalyst like
>> benchmarking DBI isn't a good test of DBIx-Class."
>
> I agree that Perrin’s analogy was a bit odd, but yours is even
> odder.

You are of course free to think so, but without some Why's I'm hardly able
to argue about it. But I always wanted to be psychic, so I'll try it
anyway :)

When I request a resource from a Catalyst application, two things are
executed: The framework logic, and my application logic. But this is not a
"first the one, then the other" execution. During the request, the
framework calls my application logic to get some response together, and my
application logic uses the framework logic in a convenient way. The
dispatching (read: The decisio on what part of my application logic to
execute) is a rather small part.

--
# Robert 'phaylon' Sedlacek
# Perl 5/Catalyst Developer in Hamburg, Germany
{ EMail => ' rs [at] 474 ', Web => ' http://474.at ' }


_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/


danielmcbrearty at gmail

Jan 18, 2007, 7:28 AM

Post #30 of 30 (1275 views)
Permalink
Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off [In reply to]

> We discussed this. Re-read the old discussion. Thread over :)


ooooh nooo it's not ....


--
Daniel McBrearty
email : danielmcbrearty at gmail.com
www.engoi.com : the multi - language vocab trainer
BTW : 0873928131

_______________________________________________
List: Catalyst [at] lists
Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst [at] lists/
Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/

Catalyst users RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.