Of course Java IS faster by a few factors then Python. I switched recently
to Play development from django and I also noticed different. Moreover Play
uses many mature tools, like JPA/Hibernate, ehcache etc which are called
industrial standards.
One more thing - Play! uses its own build-in http server, and keep one
connection to a database alive at all the time, Django run as FCGI or
mod_wsgi manages this a bit different.
On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:54 PM, drakkan <drakkan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I did a small test app that basically render a web page and do 3
> queries to the database (these queries are needed to fetch some data
> displayed on the web page). I deployed this app with nginx+uswgi
>
> here is the relevant nginx conf:
>
> location / {
> uwsgi_pass 127.0.0.1:49152;
> include uwsgi_params;
> }
>
> I configured nginx to serve the static files too:
>
> location /media {
> root <root path for media>;
> autoindex on;
> }
>
> I launch uswgi as follow:
>
> uwsgi --chdir=<path> --
> module='django.core.handlers.wsgi:WSGIHandler()' --env
> DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE=myapp.settings --master --pidfile=/tmp/project-
> master.pid --socket=127.0.0.1:49152 --max-requests=5000 --process=5
>
> then I benchmarked the app with ab:
>
> ab -n 1000 -c 4 http://127.0.0.1:80/
> This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $>
> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
> Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/
>
> Benchmarking 127.0.0.1 (be patient)
> Completed 100 requests
> Completed 200 requests
> Completed 300 requests
> Completed 400 requests
> Completed 500 requests
> Completed 600 requests
> Completed 700 requests
> Completed 800 requests
> Completed 900 requests
> Completed 1000 requests
> Finished 1000 requests
>
>
> Server Software: nginx
> Server Hostname: 127.0.0.1
> Server Port: 80
>
> Document Path: /
> Document Length: 24293 bytes
>
> Concurrency Level: 4
> Time taken for tests: 28.914 seconds
> Complete requests: 1000
> Failed requests: 0
> Write errors: 0
> Total transferred: 24423000 bytes
> HTML transferred: 24293000 bytes
> Requests per second: 34.59 [#/sec] (mean)
> Time per request: 115.654 [ms] (mean)
> Time per request: 28.914 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent
> requests)
> Transfer rate: 824.89 [Kbytes/sec] received
>
> Connection Times (ms)
> min mean[+/-sd] median max
> Connect: 0 0 0.1 0 4
> Processing: 46 115 42.6 110 636
> Waiting: 46 115 42.5 109 636
> Total: 46 116 42.6 110 636
>
> Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
> 50% 110
> 66% 121
> 75% 131
> 80% 139
> 90% 161
> 95% 177
> 98% 203
> 99% 220
> 100% 636 (longest request)
>
> now I implemented the same app using playframework, a java based
> framework and benchmarked with ab again:
>
>
> ab -n 1000 -c 4 http://127.0.0.1:9000/
> This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $>
> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/
> Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/
>
> Benchmarking 127.0.0.1 (be patient)
> Completed 100 requests
> Completed 200 requests
> Completed 300 requests
> Completed 400 requests
> Completed 500 requests
> Completed 600 requests
> Completed 700 requests
> Completed 800 requests
> Completed 900 requests
> Completed 1000 requests
> Finished 1000 requests
>
>
> Server Software: Play!
> Server Hostname: 127.0.0.1
> Server Port: 9000
>
> Document Path: /
> Document Length: 19614 bytes
>
> Concurrency Level: 4
> Time taken for tests: 4.436 seconds
> Complete requests: 1000
> Failed requests: 0
> Write errors: 0
> Total transferred: 19961000 bytes
> HTML transferred: 19614000 bytes
> Requests per second: 225.44 [#/sec] (mean)
> Time per request: 17.743 [ms] (mean)
> Time per request: 4.436 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent
> requests)
> Transfer rate: 4394.59 [Kbytes/sec] received
>
> Connection Times (ms)
> min mean[+/-sd] median max
> Connect: 0 0 0.0 0 1
> Processing: 7 18 6.6 16 47
> Waiting: 6 17 6.6 16 47
> Total: 7 18 6.6 16 47
>
> Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
> 50% 16
> 66% 19
> 75% 22
> 80% 23
> 90% 27
> 95% 30
> 98% 34
> 99% 38
> 100% 47 (longest request)
>
>
> so play is outperforming django! obviously django is not in debug mode
> ecc..., is there something wrong in my test setup (I already tried to
> adjust the uwsgi launch line I tryed more process or 1 process with
> threads ecc with no relevant improvement) or django/python is simply
> much slower than java? I tried to run play behind nginx proxy too: the
> results are pratically identical. Note the response time too: the
> slowest play response is 47 ms, the fastest django one is 110 ms,
>
> any suggestion to improve performance is appreciated,
>
> thanks in advance,
> drakkan
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Django users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django users" group.
To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
