[JodieBenitez]

> Also: does it ever make sense to write something like a CRUD+ backend in Rust?

Well... given 2 frameworks equally pleasant to work with, why not using the one with the best performance ? (Whatever performance means... less cpu ? less memory ? better i/o ?).

As a Django user, working on problems where Django shines, I have yet to see such a solution in Rust, but that doesn't mean it won't happen one day.

[rhodysurf]

I use it for backends that do a lot of math because the python deployment story sucks, rust is faster anyways, and I love rust (do python and js by day). It’s been so easy to bring up rust containers on serverless and they just don’t break. The cold start times are also insanely good compared to python

[HacklesRaised]

Whatever performance means is really interesting. One of the few unquestionable benefits of cloud computing is that it is now easier than ever to measure the 'running' cost of a program / solution.

What Amazon charges for, say a t2.nano must factor in the cost of the hardware, power, cooling, and system adminstration, so it is technically possible to evaluate the running cost of a piece of software.

If I, as the ruthless capitalist that I am pretending to be, made the running cost of the solution an integral part of annual remuneration, through bonus calculation say, there will be a tipping point when that cost has an impact on techology strategy.

I know it sounds remote but a similar scheme has/was implemented in some investment banks, where bonus calculations introduced a vesting schedule and factored in the back office cost of maintaining the trade over its lifetime rather than being based entirely on revenue.

Let's start with a totatally reasonable caculation made by a non technical user , with absolutely no understanding of the problem at hand, and by that I mean completely unfair and arbitrary, so pretty much the real world.

The TechEmpower multiple request benchmarks tell me that Rust is the performance king. Go offers about 2/3 that performance, and python 1/3, that bit doesn't sound too unreasonable, perhaps a little unkind to Go, but I digress; given these relative performance numbers, if the running cost bonus pool is $x, the maximum amount you will receive for a python based solution is 1/3x.

At what point does the financial impact influence our technology strategy in a way that perhaps our otherwise virtuous proseltysing about the need to reduce our carbon footprint doesn't?

FWIW I am continually suprised that Jon Blow, Casey Muratori , Mike Acton et al, aren't beating exactly this drum. It's not that their arguments about writing high performance software are not compelling in their own right, but appealing to peoples otherwise orthogonal concerns / passions seems to be a logical next step.

Sorry to ramble on!!