This benchmark seems irrelevant
(devclass.com)
from RealBot@lemmy.world to programming@programming.dev on 05 Jan 2024 12:36
https://lemmy.world/post/10345403
from RealBot@lemmy.world to programming@programming.dev on 05 Jan 2024 12:36
https://lemmy.world/post/10345403
The benchmark with 1B rows in this blogpost seems irrelevant for comparing performance of different programming languages.
It seems like the execution time of a program would be dominated by loading data from the file. And a lot of people posted solution with specs of cpu but not specs of disk (hdd, ssd, raid) although that seems more relevant.
Why would they compare languages and solutions in this way?
#programming
threaded - newest
To answer your question about environmental and hardware factors - from the repo:
That seems to only be for the Java code
The show and tell page is exactly that, show and tell; not a scientific or balanced comparison.
The original challenge only compared JDK solution in this way. Further down there is a link to another repo that does that same across many languages, and uses the same M1 MacBook Pro to run the tests.
I would assume they want to factor in startup time as well as IO handling overhead - raw disk IO should be the same given programs are run in the same environment.
For most organizations, the cost of paying programmers far exceeds the cost of CPU time; benchmarks really should include how long the solution took to envision/implement and how many follow up commits were required to tune it.
Also big “enterprise” Software usually becomes slow due to fundamental issues or issues in the architecture.
For example I worked on maintaining an old Java EE project and people there constantly made multiple sequencial HTTP requests despite the requests not being dependent on one another.