|
|
|
|
|
by Xorlev
4571 days ago
|
|
Well-reasoned. I've always found framework overhead and especially tech debt to be the largest contributors to performance issues. Especially when said frameworks have lots of ways to do things and they're not all the best way to do it. Modern JVM development starts to look a lot like Sinatra -- you don't get a lot baked in, but you probably didn't need it anyways. |
|
This is why Node apps often out-perform Java apps despite running on a VM that's significantly slower. Node is pervasively asynchronous...it's baked into the DNA of the platform and almost all libraries follow that philosophy. And as organizations move to a micro-services architecture where one external call can result in multiple internal calls between systems, the need for reactive, asynchronous programming becomes all the more glaring.
That's where this critique, for me, fell down. It's spent too much time comparing the JVM to V8 and not enough time talking about how the applications being run were designed. Because CPUs are fast enough these days that any of the VMs will give you decent performance for workloads that aren't CPU-bound as long as you, the application designer, do the right thing. It's just that some environments, Node in particular, make it easier to do the right thing. This will get easier in Java with the introduction of lambdas in Java 8 and the inevitable asynchronous community frameworks and libraries, but right now it's still harder to write reactive applications in Java than it is in Node.