Python common web framework simple performance test results share of django flask bottle tornado

The simplest performance of django, flask, bottle, tornado framework itself was tested. There is absolutely no word on django's performance.

Django, flask, and bottle were all started with gunicorn+gevent, single process, and turned off DEBUG, all requests returned a string of ok.

Tornado directly started on its own, other content is the same.

The test software is siege, the test OS is cenos6 64-bit, and the test command is:

siege -c 100 -r 100 -b http://127.0.0.1:5000/

The django test results are:

Transactions:               10000 hits

Availability:              100.00 %

Elapsed time:               18.51 secs

Data transferred:            0.02 MB

Response time:                0.18 secs

Transaction rate:          540.25 trans/sec

Throughput:                0.00 MB/sec

Concurrency:               99.35

Successful transactions:       10000

Failed transactions:               0

Longest transaction:            0.30

Shortest transaction:            0.12

Django (remove all middleware) test results were:

Transactions:               10000 hits

Availability:              100.00 %

Elapsed time:               12.97 secs

Data transferred:            0.02 MB

Response time:                0.13 secs

Transaction rate:          771.01 trans/sec

Throughput:                0.00 MB/sec

Concurrency:               99.41

Successful transactions:       10000

Failed transactions:               0

Longest transaction:            0.28

Shortest transaction:            0.12

Flask test results are as follows:

Transactions:               10000 hits

Availability:              100.00 %

Elapsed time:                5.47 secs

Data transferred:            0.02 MB

Response time:                0.05 secs

Transaction rate:         1828.15 trans/sec

Throughput:                0.00 MB/sec

Concurrency:               96.25

Successful transactions:       10000

Failed transactions:               0

Longest transaction:            0.11

Shortest transaction:            0.00

The test results of bottle are as follows:

Transactions:               10000 hits

Availability:              100.00 %

Elapsed time:                4.55 secs

Data transferred:            0.02 MB

Response time:                0.04 secs

Transaction rate:         2197.80 trans/sec

Throughput:                0.00 MB/sec

Concurrency:               96.81

Successful transactions:       10000

Failed transactions:               0

Longest transaction:            0.09

Shortest transaction:            0.00

Tornado test results are as follows:

Transactions:               10000 hits

Availability:              100.00 %

Elapsed time:                7.06 secs

Data transferred:            0.02 MB

Response time:                0.07 secs

Transaction rate:         1416.43 trans/sec

Throughput:                0.00 MB/sec

Concurrency:               99.51

Successful transactions:       10000

Failed transactions:               0

Longest transaction:            0.09

Shortest transaction:            0.01

It can be seen that the performance of the pure framework itself is:

bottle > flask > tornado > django

Combined with practical use:

Tornado USES an asynchronous driver, so when writing business code, performance drops dramatically if there is a small synchronization time;
Bottle has too much to implement on its own, plus it doesn't know what the performance will be;
Flask's performance is a little bit worse, but the support surrounding it is already quite extensive;
Forget django, the performance is unreadable, and the only benefit is that the development racks are set up and development is much faster

I have been worrying about the selection of a project recently, so I have measured it and recorded it here.

PS: 2014-6-23 re-tested with centos6 64 bit to get a better match with the production environment, and modified the article.