Re: [web-devel] Performance of Yesod 0.7 fourteen times slower than Rails 2.3?

Hello Knut, as stated in my last mail, it's not 79 but 7.5. And it means that in my benchmark[1], rails had an average response time of 0.53 seconds and yesod had 0.07 seconds. Greetings Sven [1] https://github.com/SKoschnicke/performance-test On 03/28/2011 02:54 PM, Knut Olav Bøhmer wrote:

Hi,

Just curies, What does "79 times slower" mean? Does it mean that when Rails-dev has processed 1 transaction Yesod did 79?

Best regards.

BTW: Saying that RoR is 79 times slower would indicate that Yesod is slow, but RoR is (79 times) slower.

On 28 March 2011 14:31, Sven Koschnicke (GFXpro)wrote:

...

Hello,

I tested again with persistent-postgresql 0.4.0.1 and now the results are what you would expect :) rails in dev mode is now 79 times slower[1]. Of course, thats not a fair compare, but Greg did some testing with rails production already. Thanks for improving that so quickly!

Greetings Sven

[1] https://github.com/SKoschnicke/performance-test

On 03/25/2011 08:41 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

Hi Sven,

Can I ask you to try things out one more time, this time with persistent-postgresql 0.4.0.1? I think I fixed some more of the issue[1].

Thanks, Michael

[1] http://docs.yesodweb.com/blog/improving-persistent-performance

On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Sven Koschnicke (GFXpro) wrote:

...

Great that you found a way to speed things up! I'm looking forward to the blog post. I will run some more tests with the improved code, just let me know when its available. Is someone working on improving the postgres database backend? Maybe I could help there, the bad performance with postgres is really a showstopper for me.

Sven

On 03/23/2011 08:13 AM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

...

This was a great example of a performance bug being exactly where you don't expect it. I'm planning on writing up a blog post on this adventure later, but for the quick summary: the Criterion benchmarks have gone from 23.7ms (== 23,700us) to 141us. Meaning this is a 200 fold speedup for some operations. This came from switching a large monad transformer stack to a single RWS monad. But more on that in the blog post.

I've run your test a few more times: it still seems like there's a slowdown from the database code, but I think the widget performance bug was the big issue. After some more testing on my end, I'll put the code on Hackage. Would you give the test another shot after that?

Thanks again for bringing this up!

Michael

On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Sven Koschnicke (GFXpro) wrote:

...

Hello,

I think your guess wasn't completely wrong. I tested with Sqlite now, and with that rails and yesod are equally slow (rails 11.81 secs vs yesod 11.36 secs). But its also interesting that your code change speeds it up.

(I put the sqlite benchmark at https://github.com/SKoschnicke/performance-test/tree/sqlite)

My first guess was actually that its the marshalling which slows yesod so much and that rails uses some clever optimizations there, but I haven't got enough insight to validate that.

Greetings Sven

On 03/21/2011 01:49 PM, Michael Snoyman wrote:

> > Looks like my initial guess was completely wrong: on my system, almost > no time is spent on the database query. Instead, it looks like there's > some kind of performance issue with Hamlet. For example, changing line > 20 of Handler/Quote.hs from "addWidget" to "addHtml" increases > performance dramatically (25 sec to 4.5 sec). I'll need to spend some > more time to properly diagnose the problem. Again, thanks for bringing > this to my attention. > > Michael > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:40 PM, Michael Snoyman> > wrote: > >> >> Firstly, thank you for running this benchmark: it's the only way we >> can find out where Yesod needs to be fixed. >> >> I haven't had a chance to look into the code properly, but it looks >> like this is more a test of the database backend than of the web >> framework. I'll try to get to this myself later, but it would be very >> interesting to see the difference in response times between >> PostgreSQL >> and sqlite. Currently, persistent-sqlite binds directly to the sqlite >> C API, while persistent-postgresql uses HDBC. It's entirely possible >> that HDBC is adding some overhead. >> >> One of the items on our wish list[1] is to migrate away from HDBC. >> Having hard numbers like you are providing will help us figure out >> our >> priorities a bit better. >> >> Thanks, >> Michael >> >> [1] http://wiki.yesodweb.com/Wishlist >> >> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:10 PM, Sven Koschnicke (GFXpro) >> wrote: >> >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I'm coming from a Rails background and was very impressed by the >>> features of >>> the Yesod Web Framework. Working on an trading app in Rails I wanted >>> to >>> port >>> some features of this app to a Yesod app just to learn the framework >>> and >>> because we have some performance issues with Rails. >>> >>> The first thing I noticed was that the Yesod app was significantly >>> slower >>> than the Rails app at trivial tasks. I am very astonished about >>> that. >>> I >>> thought Rails should be slower because of its interpreted nature. I >>> made >>> some benchmarking and measured that a simple Rails app is fourteen >>> times >>> faster than a Yesod app that did the same thing (loading some >>> records >>> from >>> the database and displaying them). Did I made a mistake or is my >>> understanding, that the compiled app should be faster, just wrong? >>> >>> I documented the results on github: >>> >>> https://github.com/SKoschnicke/performance-test >>> >>> Greetings >>> Sven Koschnicke >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> web-devel mailing list >>> web-devel@haskell.org >>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel >>> >>> >>

_______________________________________________ web-devel mailing list web-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel

_______________________________________________ web-devel mailing list web-devel@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/web-devel