[Catalyst] Re: Catalyst vs Rails vs Django Cook off

[Marcello Romani]

David Morel ha scritto:
> 
> Le 15 janv. 07 à 21:51, Christopher Hicks a écrit :
> 
>> On Mon, Jan 15, 2007 at 08:27:08PM +0100, Daniel McBrearty wrote:
>>> I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be meaningful if it was done
>>> well. Not that anyone should choose their framework on the basis of
>>> such a benchmark, but it's a factor to throw into the mix
> 
> Does that include dynamic content caching wizardry ? It is meaningless 
> if you don't take into account real-life scenarios like reverse proxy 
> cache invalidation policies (and tricks). This is just to say that all 
> this perf talk is meaningless : sometimes the power you get from a well 
> thought out framework allows you to do things that are close to magick, 
> speed-wise among others. Comparing simple setups is ridiculous IMHO.
> 
> David Morel

If a framework makes development easier because it's more elegant, easy 
to use, or whatever, then you may have more time to think about setting 
up a more efficient deployment architecture (i.e. the thinks mentioned 
above).
Therefore it seems to me that ease of developement might be more 
important to the overall app performance than the raw speed in simple 
test cases.

Just my 2 (euro)cents.

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> List: Catalyst at lists.rawmode.org
> Listinfo: http://lists.rawmode.org/mailman/listinfo/catalyst
> Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/catalyst@lists.rawmode.org/
> Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
> 
> 


-- 
Marcello Romani
Responsabile IT
Ottotecnica s.r.l.
http://www.ottotecnica.com