They're out, and they include a serious Ur/Web configuration error for
one of the platforms (and I hope this error is fixed in amended
results), but there is already some good info here to support claims of
high performance for Ur/Web. Here's the text I added to the FAQ:
Can you be more specific about run-time performance?
The TechEmpower Web Framework Benchmarks
<http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/> provide a performance
comparison managed by a third party. Ur/Web does pretty well, and you
can check that site for details, but a few caveats are important. First,
the Ur/Web programming model is unusually oriented toward security and
concurrency simplicity. For instance, Ur/Web's standard random number
generation function generates cryptographically secure numbers, which
imposes an extra run-time cost in the several benchmarks based on random
numbers; and Ur/Web's concurrency model allows the programmer to think
of every piece of code as running inside a transaction, which imposes
extra run-time cost in the several benchmarks that use databases,
necessarily within a transaction per request, unlike in almost all other
frameworks' entries in the benchmarks. Also, by the way, the current i7
numbers were captured under a serious configuration error and should be
ignored.
OK, having said all that, Ur/Web is still doing pretty darn well!
Consider the results for the highest-capacity machine in the benchmarks,
which provides 48 hardware threads. In rough numbers, here's how Ur/Web
is doing.
Test Requests/sec. Latency
Hello world in JSON 400k 0.6 ms
1 SQL query 100k 2 ms
20 SQL queries 10k 24 ms
20 SQL query/update pairs 500 2 s
Yeah, Ur/Web is really falling over in the many-updates test, with
optimistic SQL concurrency thrashing to provide the transactional
semantics that most benchmark entrants don't bother to shoot for. Still,
very few web sites process as much as hundreds of requests per second!
Despite Ur/Web's performance handicaps in service of a pleasant
programming model, on the Fortunes test, which is closest to the
scenario Ur/Web was designed for, Ur/Web has the best latency and
4th-best throughput, out of about 50 frameworks passing that test's
basic sanity check. In the spirit of sibling rivalry, I'll also point
out that the Haskell frameworks consistently achieve less than half the
throughput of Ur/Web.
_______________________________________________
Ur mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.impredicative.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ur
