Framework Performance: Ruby on Rails vs Django vs Symfony
Someone (and it's unsure who, as they left no byline) recently decided to run some benchmarks against the three major Web application development frameworks, Ruby on Rails, Django and Symfony.
Firstly, they developed a simple application in all three frameworks that tested similar functions such as basic database functionality, reloading pages, and so forth. They tested the applications with 50 concurrent virtual users and 150 concurrent virtual users on a dual Xeon 3.2GHz server with 2 gigabytes of RAM, and produced some basic statistics for the results.
The testing, however, appeared to be flawed, with the tester admitting that in the 150 user test with Symfony, most requests returned with a 500 Internal Server Error. Their main set of successful results, however, shows that Rails proved significantly faster than Symfony, but Django proved faster still. They also demonstrated that not using a PHP accelerator significantly slowed down the already slow Symfony (a good counterpoint to those PHP programmers who claim their language is the fastest.. it's how you use it that counts!). 10 Mongrel processes also seemed to just outperform a lighttpd-based FastCGI configuration.
the rules of the scientific community (which had a very large part in building up todays body of knowledge) has very strict rules on publishing: any publication must precisely state *who* did *what* based on *what previous work* and is then peer-reviewed to assess its credibility.
It seems worthwhile recalling these basic rules when "someone anonymous did something that seems to be flawed", as in the piece of work referred to in this posting (interesting as it may appear)...
seems to be flawed?
The reality is, however, one of pragmatism. These anecdotal results may be of some use and do provide a comparison. This is not an academic or scientific journal (where more stringent requirements are the norm) and we publish information about things that may be of use, whether they're bylined or not. After all, if this were a scientific journal, this blog post would have had to go through a peer review itself ;-)
it's time to put the flame jacket on.
if this was a "flame" than it must have been the most polite flame i've ever seen ;-)
and actually, my critique was addressed at the original piece of work (anonymous, flawed) and not at your citation of it. after all, postings and discusssions on this forum *are* a kind of peer-review...