A set of "Hello World" benchmarks comparing FastWSGI's performance to other popular WSGI servers.
All benchmarks were performed with wrk on Ubuntu 20.04 with an Intel i9 9900k CPU.
- 8 threads
- 100 concurrent connections
- 60 second load duration
All servers were set up to use just a single worker (1 process). To see each server implementation, see the servers folder.
wrk -t8 -c100 -d60 http://localhost:5000 --latencyTo see detailed results for each WSGI server, see the results folder.
If you would like to reproduce these benchmarks on your own system you can clone this repo and run:
Note: You will need to have wrk installed in order to run the benchmarks yourself.
cd performance_benchmarks/
./benchmark_all.sh
This group of benchmarks compares how a simple "Hello World" WSGI application performs with varying underlying WSGI servers.
import fastwsgi
def application(environ, start_response):
headers = [('Content-Type', 'text/plain')]
start_response('200 OK', headers)
return [b'Hello, World!']
if __name__ == '__main__':
fastwsgi.run(wsgi_app=application, host='127.0.0.1', port=5000)For a simple WSGI application, if you're looking for speed, FastWSGI is simply unmatched!
On a single worker, over 70k requests per second and over 4 million requests served in 60 seconds!
This group of benchmarks compares how a simple "Hello World" Flask application performs with varying underlying WSGI servers.
import fastwsgi
from flask import Flask
app = Flask(__name__)
@app.get('/')
def hello_world():
return 'Hello, World!', 200
if __name__ == '__main__':
fastwsgi.run(wsgi_app=app, host='127.0.0.1', port=5000)FastWSGI performs on par with bjoern, another ultra fast WSGI server written in C. It appears that Flask is the likely bottleneck here and not the WSGI server being used. Pushing a simple Flask application significantly beyond 9k Requests per second on a single worker seems unlikely.
