|
|
|
|
|
by chrismccord
3253 days ago
|
|
Phoenix creator here. The techmeme results are not representative of the framework. Several months ago they added Phoenix in a preview, but it was a very poor implementation. They were testing JSON benchmarks through the :browser pipeline, complete with crsf token generation. They had a dev DB pool size of 10, where other frameworks were given of pool size of 100. And they also had heavy IO logging, where other frameworks did no logging. We sent a PR to address these issues, and I was hoping to see true results in the subsequent runs, but no preview was provided this time and we weren't able to work with them on the error rate issues they ran into. After these experiences we've decided the core-team's time is better spent on the framework than chasing techmeme issues. If you go by real-world success stories from companies switching from Django, Rails, etc, you can certainly expect much better. |
|
I've seen several instances of this, now. Some Rails benchmarks jumped up pretty high as well when they managed to get someone to competently configure Puma. Practically the same story, just changing out names.
Take techempower benchmarks with a boatload of salt. Not only are they not particularly representative of your real world use cases, they apparently are often not representative of competent use of the tools they're benchmarking.
Hopefully this is an issue the techempower people figure out some way to address. It would be nice if this was a more trustworthy resource.