News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by Ao7bei3s on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @11:55AM (#9846202)
Go is 1-2 orders of magnitude faster than Ruby, and much easier to write concurrent code in.

It makes perfect sense to me. What would you have recommended them, for a reasonably-high-performance server implementation? (Please don't say C.)

https://benchmarksgame.alioth.debian.org/u64q/benchmark.php?...

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by fasteo on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:49PM (#9846571)
>>> It makes perfect sense to me

Yes. Other than some very basic scripts, I have never worked with Ruby, so I was not aware that it is so slow. Thanks for pointing that out.

As for my recommendation, it is pretty standard worker architecture:

Their system seems to be an ingesting-only system, that is, the clients are getting an empty HTTP 200 OK response. Given this, I would put openresty (nginx) in the front, with some trivial Lua code[1] to en-queue payloads to beanstalkd. Then, you can either have your workers inside openresty (using Openresty timers) or have them as separate processes and written in the language of choice. We have been using this for a couple of years now and it is working really well for our use case, also an ingesting-only system.

[1] https://github.com/smallfish/lua-resty-beanstalkd/blob/maste...

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by sinzone on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @04:26PM (#9847853)
we use the same technology with KONG [1]

[1] https://github.com/mashape/kong

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by saosebastiao on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:52PM (#9846588)
Scala, Java, Clojure, C#, F#, Node, LuaJIT, Erlang, Elixir, Haskell, D, Nim... There are lots of reasonably fast options out there that aren't C.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by vidarh on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @03:46PM (#9847643)
> Go is 1-2 orders of magnitude faster than Ruby

That may be true for some types of code, but for an app that's predominantly shuffling data over the network you should be spending most of the time in kernel space executing syscalls, and then language differences are largely irrelevant.

> and much easier to write concurrent code in.

How? Writing concurrent code in Ruby is trivial since 1.9.x (prior to 1.9 you had to battle the green threads in MRI for some stuff), which isn't exactly new.

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by pjmlp on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @01:06PM (#9846662)
> Go is 1-2 orders of magnitude faster than Ruby, and much easier to write concurrent code in.

Than MRI Ruby you mean.

The advantage wouldn't be as much if Ruby designers cared to add AOT compilation in the same vein as Dylan or Common Lisp to the canonical implementation.

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by pselbert on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @01:51PM (#9846964)
That's exactly the space that Crystal [0] seems to be exploring. Statically type checked and pre-compiled via LLVM. So it isn't the Ruby designers themselves, but definitely Ruby flavored.

0: http://crystal-lang.org/

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by dragonwriter on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @01:15PM (#9846711)
> > Go is 1-2 orders of magnitude faster than Ruby, and much easier to write concurrent code in.

> Than MRI Ruby you mean.

Given the nature of orders-of-magnitude comparisons and the lack of Ruby implementations that are even one order of magnitude faster than MRI, "...than Ruby" is reasonably accurate if "...than MRI Ruby" is at all accurate.

> The advantage wouldn't be as much if Ruby designers cared to add AOT compilation in the same vein as Dylan or Common Lisp to the canonical implementation.

Maybe, though that's unproven. AFAIK, actual Ruby implementations with AOT only seem to gain about a factor of 2 improvement, not an order of magnitude.

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by arthurcolle on Wednesday July 08, 2015 @07:30AM (#9850925)
I was always a big fan of Erlang's concurrency model but I've really been getting into Elixir lately. It is just such a productive language to write and lends itself to extremely maintainable codebases.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by andrewvc on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @02:35PM (#9847287)
There's nothing concurrent in this case, parallel sure, but concurrency wise this is all shared nothing. And languages are not faster than one another. They are faster at certain tasks but the variability for a given task is really case specific. For io heavy workloads like this underlying libraries and implementations dominate execution time.

You could have written this in any number of languages. I don't know why go is more logical than say Java JavaScript.

Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by plydatbk on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:02PM (#9846255)
Lua would beat go every day of the week.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by cdelsolar on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:40PM (#9846504)
[citation needed]
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by jbeja on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:08PM (#9846301)
As Clojure would beat Lua every second of a day.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by saosebastiao on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:26PM (#9846437)
I'm a big clojure fan and not the biggest Lua fan, but I'm afraid you are mistaken. You won't find any dynamically typed language implementation that can come close to LuaJIT for the general use case.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by raspasov on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @03:40PM (#9847619)
What if you type hint everything in Clojure properly so all reflection is avoided? (does take some time, but with something like YourKit it'll be only a few hours max on a mid-size project)
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by bitcrusher on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:21PM (#9846403)
If you're talking about raw performance, I'm afraid you're mistaken. If you're perhaps referring to the 'aesthetics' of the language syntax, that's pretty subjective, in which case you're right for your tastes.
Re:Handling 1M Requests per Minute with Go by plydatbk on Tuesday July 07, 2015 @12:17PM (#9846379)
show me the clojure firewall and I'll take you seriously. Or the even something simple as an interesting clojure ML project. Java gross.