Python continues to get better async support and with that comes pressure to switch. See the realistic effects that switching to async would have on your web servers.
  • Rimu@piefed.socialEnglish
    4·
    11 days ago

    Wow, very interesting to see Sync doing so well in comparison!

    But I thought a lot of the advantage of async is it’s ability to handle many concurrent requests? What happens if you run the same tests but this time with 100 requests in parallel?

    • solrize@lemmy.ml
      31·
      10 days ago

      I’ve run python progs with 1000+ threads and it’s fine. 10k might be harder. Async is overrated. Erlang and elixir are preferable.

      • logging_strict@programming.dev
        1·
        9 days ago

        overrated or not the choice is between sync or async drivers. Actually there is no choice, just an illusion of choice.

        So async or async … choose. Without the web router running multithreaded, concurrency will have minimal effect. But everything is step by step. freethreaded hasn’t been out for very long.

    • Ephera@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1·
      9 days ago

      I mean, it’s a bit of a weird comparison to begin with. Web servers were always able to parallelize without async, because they’d just spawn a new thread per request. The real advantage of async is programs where working with threads isn’t as trivial…

      • hackeryarn@lemmy.worldOP
        2·
        9 days ago

        I totally agree with you. This article was really a response to a lot of hype around async web servers in Python.

        I kind of knew what to expect, but wanted to throw real numbers against it. I was surprised to see a 10x slowdown with the async switch in Django.