nanobind VS fastapi

Take a look at https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

> More concretely, benchmarks show up to ~4× faster compile time, ~5× smaller binaries, and ~10× lower runtime overheads compared to pybind11.

People should not take that an endorsement of Swig.

Please use ctypes, cffi or https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

Beazley himself is amazed that it (Swig) is still in use.

Nanobind made by the creator of PyBind11, it has a similar interface, but it takes leverage of C++17 and it aims to have more efficient bindings in space and speed.

I would recommend using NanoBind, the follow up of PyBind11 by the same author (Wensel Jakob), and move as much performance critical code to C or C++. https://github.com/wjakob/nanobind

If you really care about performance called from Python, consider something like NVIDIA Warp (Preview). Warp jits and runs your code on CUDA or CPU. Although Warp targets physics simulation, geometry processing, and procedural animation, it can be used for other tasks as well. https://github.com/NVIDIA/warp

Jax is another option, by Google, jitting and vectorizing code for TPU, GPU or CPU. https://github.com/google/jax

FastAPI is a modern, high-performance web framework for building APIs with Python, based on standard Python type hints.

In this tutorial, I will demonstrate how to use Burr, an open source framework (disclosure: I helped create it), using simple OpenAI client calls to GPT4, and FastAPI to create a custom email assistant agent. We’ll describe the challenge one faces and then how you can solve for them. For the application frontend we provide a reference implementation but won’t dive into details for it.

That’s when I found FastAPI.

FastAPI & Uvicorn

Discussion at FastAPI GitHub: https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi/issues/2696

An API application framework (such as FastAPI)

It’s been my experience that async Python frameworks tend to turn IO bound problems into CPU bound problems with a high enough request rate, because due to their nature they act as unbounded queues.

This ends up made worse if you’re using sync routes.

If you’re constrained on a resource such as a database connection pool, your framework will continue to pull http requests off the wire that a sane client will cancel and retry due to timeouts because it takes too long to get a connection out of the pool. Since there isn’t a straightforward way to cancel the execution of a route handler in every Python http framework I’ve seen exhibit this problem, the problem quickly snowballs.

This is an issue with fastapi, too- https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi/issues/5759

Fast API.

We will create our API using FastAPI, a modern high-performance web framework for building fast APIs with Python. It is designed to be easy to use, efficient, and highly scalable. Some key features of FastAPI include: