|
cached 4 months ago
How does tornado on twisted perform relative to tornado?
|
|
cached 4 months ago
Needs more tornado. Or, err, twisted.web.
|
|
cached 4 months ago
|
|
cached 4 months ago
Hmm, for a second I though this was a follow-up on tornado vs twisted rant. And now the twisted side...
|
|
cached 4 months ago
That is, tornado is not more simple without twisted. That's not exactly what I'd say. :) Tornado without twisted is simpler than tornado with twisted, because you can't ignore the huge system you'd otherwise be able to avoid. Edit to remove mild flame. |
|
cached 4 months ago
Both twisted and Tornado are very fun to work on and I think it is great they are focused on performance. This is nothing but good for web frameworks in Python.
|
|
cached 4 months ago
How would one do things right if there are no examples of comparable quality? Revisit the recent drama with twisted vs tornado. |
|
cached 4 months ago
Am I mis-reading that graph or is it the case that twisted.web handles half the concurrent connections that tornado does /and/ more slowly? Is it possible that twisted performing "almost as well" as tornado might be exaggerated?
|
|
cached 19 days ago
You do not need special db adapters for tornado/twisted. The one that comes out of the box for tornado is a thin wrapper over the mysqldb library, and I've seen mysqldb used in twisted applications.
|
|
cached 4 months ago
The Tornado front page refers to itself as a framework six times, but we're splitting hairs. Twisted is, at least for now, more general purpose. Can't wait to see where Tornado goes though. |
