I agree we should try reproduce those benchmarks becomes something is clearly very wrong. I cannot find the code used for those benchmarks, so I added a comment asking for it.
On Tuesday, 25 September 2012 07:59:13 UTC-5, Jose C wrote: > > Hi Massimo, > > I too agree that benchmarks, like statistics, can be very deceptive. > > The point is comparing just 2 of the frameworks that I'm personally > interested in (and I would have imagined had similar startup overheads), > i.e. web2py and django, you see web2py getting 686 requests compared to > django's 15,346! That's a massive difference and like Michele's comment, I > wonder if there is something that can be learnt from this and some > optimization performed that might help with future versions? The numbers > certainly look bad for any new person going through the process of choosing > a framework to start with. > > On the memory leak issue, the author says he hit it running the simple > "hello world" script test. I imagine he's not creating a class with a self > reference as you mentioned for his simple test. > > Perhaps one of the devs could try simulate the test (the author seems that > have released all the test code and setup scripts) and see whether the > memory leak issue is indeed present. > > P.S. I do realize that even django doesn't have sessions enabled by > default and wouldn't be surprised if that factor alone accounts for the > difference. A person selecting a framework up front won't know that > though. Perhaps Massimo should point it out in the author's blog comments, > specifically all the setup work being done by web2py to make the framework > real-world usable. > --
