Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django

Re:Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django by tticvs on Sunday June 06, 2021 @06:06AM (#27412019)

I agree, the “batteries included” approach makes it very attractive for a new startup to use to get off the ground quickly. But in every case I have seen (3 separate companies now) it lets the team run up a huge amount of tech debt and get a lot of features locked into a very unscaleable, unperformant, architecture.

It’s tempting to prototype with it, but I can’t think of a single use case that wouldn’t be better served with another framework.

Django is not appropriate for production imo

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django by boxed on Sunday June 06, 2021 @12:06PM (#27414042)

What a load of crap. I worked for 10 years on a huge code base.

Using flask and SQLAlchemy is worse in every way for example.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django by tticvs on Monday June 07, 2021 @06:34AM (#27420981)

Yes, those would also be a very bad choice for a large project. But at least they have the advantage of being very lightweight so can be a good fit for adding simple crud features to a microservice, especially ML services that already need to use python for other reasons.

Django is the worst of both worlds. Not suited for small services, and not able to scale with large ones.

To your "load of crap" point, web development looked very different >10 years ago, Django was a lot better fit for that era. There is _zero_ reason to use it today.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django by boxed on Friday June 11, 2021 @02:44PM (#27477027)

What would you suggest as an alternative?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Django Unicorn – A full-stack framework for Django by junon on Sunday June 06, 2021 @07:25AM (#27412360)

Entirely agreed. This has been my experience as well.

[ Parent | on HN ]