Long term perf trends comparing ActiveRecord to Sequel. https://rubybench.org/rails/rails/commits?result_type=activerecord/postgres_scope_all&display_count=500&compare_with=sequel/postgres_scope_all … , AR 5.5x slower in this bench. Thanks heaps @bmarkons
-
-
Replying to @samsaffron @bmarkons
This benchmark inserts `nil` for the timestamps when using Sequel. These are not benchmarking the same thing
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
we got to fix that then ... let me have a quick look
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samsaffron @bmarkons
Surprised you would ever accept a 5x difference to be true here TBH. Both of these are going to be dominated by IO
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
lets see, 376 vs 71 ... yeah that is 5x I can accept that
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samsaffron @bmarkons
Again, you aren't casting the dates in your raw benchmark. Apples to oranges.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I absolutely am, using a coder
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samsaffron @bmarkons
No, you aren't. puts results.getvalue(i, 2).class.name It's a string.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
@jeremyevans0 wrote a monster implementation of date parsing in sequel_pg https://gist.github.com/SamSaffron/1f743f9223af5fa44ffbfa4cf9c2c77f … faster than built in2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Heh well if we're going to do comparisons on code written in not-Ruby, just wait until you see our new driver... ;P
-
-
;P ... trying to get comparisons out in the public for all available implementations, if you have some time would love a review on rubybench
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samsaffron @bmarkons
I do think it's funny how it's pretty easy to accidentally make raw pg slower than AR https://gist.github.com/sgrif/38e1d3f59cf0ed59646dbbee07236a11 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.