My experiences with Groovy are similar. Noticeable slowdown, but quite bearable (almost always better than 50% of best attainable speed).
The highest virtue is that simple programs become simple again. Word count is < 5 lines of code. On 3/31/08 6:10 PM, "Colin Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At Metaweb, we did a lot of comparisons between streaming (using Python) > and native Java, and in general streaming performance was not much > slower than the native java -- most of the slowdown was from Python > being a slow language. > > The main problems with streaming apps that we found are that they are > hard to write and there are many ways that you can make simple mistakes > in streaming that slow down performance. > > We've been experimenting with embedding JavaScript (Rhino) and Jython > for writing jobs, and have found that performance is good and the apps > are much easier to write. The tight Java integration means that > performance bottlenecks get rewritten in Java with little sacrifice to > development speed. One of these days we'll open source these frameworks. > > > > Parand Darugar wrote: >> Travis Brady wrote: >>> This brings up two interesting issues: >>> >>> 1. Hadoop streaming is a potentially very powerful tool, especially for >>> those of us who don't work in Java for whatever reason >>> 2. If Hadoop streaming is "at best a jury rigged solution" then that >>> should >>> be made known somewhere on the wiki. If it's really not supposed to be >>> used, why is it provided at all? >>> >> >> A set of reasonable performance tests and results would be very >> helpful in helping people decide whether to go with streaming or not. >> Hopefully we can get some numbers from this thread and publish them? >> Anyone else compared streaming with native java? >> >> Best, >> >> Parand >
