gqlgen VS FrameworkBenchmarks

GraphQL’s spec, as it turns out, does not specify how servers should handle internal errors at all, leaving it entirely to the choice of the frameworks’ creators. Take for example our GoLang GraphQL framework of choice - gqlgen. It makes no distinction between intentional and unexpected errors: all errors are returned as-is to the client within the error message. Internal errors, which often contain sensitive information like network details and internal URIs, would leak to clients easily if not caught manually by the programmer.

Better look into this one: https://github.com/99designs/gqlgen for GraphQL powered by Go. It's spec first approach and requires the least boilerplate code to write. It also incorporates seamlessly with Apollo Federation.

I left PHP for Go.

- with http://sqlc.dev I don't have to write ORM or model code anymore.

- with http://goa.design I can have well-documented API's that any team can generate a client for in any language. It also generates the HTTP JSON and gRPC servers for me so I can focus on my logic.

- with https://github.com/99designs/gqlgen I can define GraphQL revolvers that play well with sqlc (any RDBMS) or I can use a key-value store.

- speaking of key-value stores, Go allows them to be embedded! Even SQLite now has the https://litestream.io/ project to make it super simple to use a durable, always backed-up SQLite database even in a serverless context.

Go is faster, uses less memory, and has really-well designed stdlib without all the bugs I used to face trying to use the PHP stdlib.

Gqlgen if I need GraphQL

Some of these features are inspired by gqlgen so check it out if you need a Golang GraphQL server implementation.

If you want to use GraphQL: https://github.com/99designs/gqlgen

In addition to the ones you mentioned, I also always use: + sqlc - Compile SQL to type-safe code + gqlgen - generate GraphQL server from schema + oapi-codegen - Go client and server boilerplate from OpenAPI 3 specifications + pester - Go http calls with retries and backoff + backoff - exponential backoff algorithm in Go

I have no experience in Django but in Ent with GraphQL.

Ent is not a full-featured web framework so you need to implement many of features by your own or use other libraries (e.g. http server and session management).

If you are only looking for ORM + GraphQL then I highly recommend trying Entgql, an Ent extension for GraphQL with Gqlgen library [1]. Once you define an ORM schema, it will generate GraphQL Query for Relay server. Still you need to implement GraphQL Mutations by your own but at least it will create Input types for you (both for Create/Update).

[1]: https://github.com/99designs/gqlgen

gqlgen for GraphQL services. It's well documented and maintained.

For me sqlc work wonders. If you are developing a user facing api and are fine to go with graphql, with gqlgen you can even autobind (search the page for @goModel) the models that sqlc generates from your queries. A glorious match

Neat. Thanks for sharing!

Interestingly, may-minihttp is faring very well in the TechEmpower benchmark [1], for whatever those benchmarks are worth. The code is also surprisingly straightforward [2].

[1] https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/

[2] https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/blob/mast...

ntex was formed after a schism in actix-web and Rust safety/unsafety, with ntex allowing more unsafe code for better performance.

ntex is at the top of the TechEmpower benchmarks, although those benchmarks are not apples-to-apples since each uses its own tricks: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

Ruby is slow. Very slow. How much you may ask? https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s... fastest Ruby entry is at 272th place. Sure, top entries tend to have questionable benchmark-golfing implementations, but it gives you a good primer on the overhead imposed by Ruby.

It is also not early 00s anymore, when you pick an interpreted language, you are not getting "better productivity and tooling". In fact, most interpreted languages lag behind other major languages significantly in the form of JS/TS, Python and Ruby suffering from different woes when it comes to package management and publishing. I would say only TS/JS manages to stand apart with being tolerable, and Python sometimes too by a virtue of its popularity and the amount of information out there whenever you need to troubleshoot.

If you liked Go but felt it being a too verbose to your liking, give .NET a try. I am advocating for it here on HN mostly for fun but it is, in fact, highly underappreciated, considered unsexy and boring while it's anything but after a complete change of trajectory in the last 3-5 years. It is actually the* stack people secretly want but simply don't know about because it is bundled together with Java in the public perception.

*productive CLI tooling, high performance, works well in a really wide range of workloads from low to high level, by far the best ORM across all languages and back-end framework that is easier to work with than Node.JS while consuming 0.1x resources

Although that seems to have improved in recent years.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=json§...

RoR and whatever C++ based web backend there is count as a valid comparison in my book. But comparing the languages itself is maybe a bit off.

On a side note, you can actually compare their performance here if you’re really curious. But take it with a grain of salt since these are synthetic benchmarks.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks

Most benchmarks you'll find essentially have someone's thumb on the scale (intentionally or unintentionally). Most people won't know the different languages well enough to create comparable implementations and if you let different people create the implementations, cheating happens. The TechEmpower benchmarks aren't bad, but many implementations put their thumb on the scale (https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks). For example, a lot of the Go implementations avoid the GC by pre-allocating/reusing structs or allocate arrays knowing how big they need to be in advance (despite that being against the rules). At some point, it becomes "how many features have you turned off." Some Go http routers (like fasthttp and those built off it like Atreugo and Fiber) aren't actually correct and a lot of people in the Go community discourage their use, but they certainly top the benchmarks. Gin and Echo are usually the ones that are well-respected in the Go community.

There is certainly a lot of speculation in Techempower benchmarks and top entries can utilize questionable techniques like simply writing a byte array literal to output stream instead of constructing a response, or (in the past) DB query coalescing to work around inherent limitations of the DB in case of Fortunes or DB quries.

And yet, the fastest Ruby entry is at 274th place while Rails is at 427th.

https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#hw=ph&test=fortune&s...

oh what machine? with how many workers? doing what?

search for "node" on this page: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

JustJS would like a word https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r20&tes...

In terms of RPS, this web service is more-or-less the fortunes benchmark in the techempower benchmarks, once the data hits the cache: https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r21

Or, at least, they would be after applying optimizations to them.

In short, both of these would serve more rps than you will likely ever need on even the lowest end virtual machines. The underlying API provider will probably cut you off from querying them before you run out of RPS.