upvote

points

by 5d41402abc4b7 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby faangguyindia7 hours ago|
[-]
Java is a resource hog when you use patterns and libraries popular in Java land. When you are working in the Java ecosystem, you just assume that this much resource is needed by the app! But when you'll code the same thing in Go using the same methods, you'll find resource usage is really very low.

We’ve a 1: 1 copy of the app; on JVM, it's using 2GB RAM using Spring Boot, and on Go, it runs on 512MB RAM and is blazingly fast.

ofc, it's possible to tune java app but why bother? when we get same low resource usage and better performance in Go from get go while still writing naive and dumb code?

Deployment is super simple in Go, upload a single cross compiled binary it's done. Very simple and easy.

Rust needs a lot more effort to write correct code than Go in my experience. We get the same performance out of Go, with much less effort. At some point, it's just cheaper to start one extra instance than perform some low-level optimisation; modern hardware is fast enough that Rust-level optimisation is rarely needed for what we do.

reply
upvoteby gf0001 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
You are comparing a (the most?) featureful web framework to a vanilla http server.. of course one will be significantly more resource heavy.
reply
upvoteby tpoacher3 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
> using SpringBoot

well there's your answer, isn't it?

reply
upvoteby rowanG0776 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
I cant really agree on Rust. It does take a bit more time to write the same code in rust vs go. But in my experience the code is much more likely to be incorrect in go than it is in rust. Which over longer periods means rust is easier to maintain.
reply
upvoteby kakwa_4 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
On the other hand, most pieces of software in this world are kind of mediocre code written by unmotivated employees within tight timelines.

In such context, I think Go might be a better or at least, more realistic, compromise in most cases.

reply
upvoteby rowanG0771 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If you have unmotivated employees then using Go will only exacerbate the shortcomings it has. Cutting corners is much easier in Go than it is in Rust. But in general it's true, if you want a piece of code released a bit faster but spend more in developer hours maintaining it later than Go is the better fit. And there are definitely use cases for that.
reply
upvoteby zozbot23443 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
You can write exploratory code in Rust fairly quickly, it's just obvious when you've done so due to the heavy boilerplate involved. Keep in mind that the earliest versions of Rust were actually very Golang-like, the language iteratively evolved towards what it is today.
reply
upvoteby y0ned45 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
This article convinced me to switch from Go to Rust: https://discord.com/blog/why-discord-is-switching-from-go-to...
reply
upvoteby rienbdj4 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The issues with Go in that article only surfaced at Discord scale.
reply
upvoteby imtringued5 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
I'm not sure the effort part makes sense now that we have LLMs? LLMs basically liberate language choice, which has made Rust incredibly attractive to me since I basically get good performance out of the box, while any possibly annoying pedantic obsession with correctness can be easily handed over to the LLM.

If I use a JVM language, running my test suite takes 10 to 30 seconds. With Rust it spends 3 seconds compiling and half a second to run 250 tests.

The irritating parts of Rust are more related with bloated libraries like serde that insist on generating code which massively slows down compilation for not much benefit.

reply
upvoteby gf0001 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
> If I use a JVM language, running my test suite takes 10

Sounds like a bad build tool.

reply