Related
I've got a reasonably-sized ASP.NET MVC/WebApi web application (~100KLOCS) that is creaking a bit under the load (about 1MM requests / day). For instance, a page typically takes 2-3 seconds to load, which is a good deal off from optimal. As I've started looking around for possible bottlenecks, I can't help but notice that Ninject, my IOC container, is rated the slowest by a very healthy margin:
http://www.palmmedia.de/Blog/2011/8/30/ioc-container-benchmark-performance-comparison
https://github.com/ninject/ninject/issues/84
Has anybody else been in this position and tried replacing Ninject for something else, e.g., LightInject, SimpleInject, or something of that ilk? Was it worth the effort? Ninject seems to be the most popular, with lots of community and framework support, and I'm not at all eager to get myself hung out on a project that's going to end up being unsupported. Beyond that, I'm not sure how test to see whether, in a real world application, the IOC container's performance will even get noticed.
Anybody out there have any real-world stories or scars worth sharing? Or suggestions about how to tell if Ninject is even a bottleneck?
I know I am a little late to the game with this question, and I'm sure you've already come to some conclusion, but this is something I find myself asking quite a lot lately. Ninject is certainly not the fastest, but it is (in my opinion), the most flexible and extensible framework I have ever used, and it is an absolute joy to work with. I have never run into an IoC problem that I couldn't resolve with Ninject.
It's a trade off really. When I am working with a client where flexibility and extensibility is key, usually internal facing line of business apps, I use Ninject. When I'm working on small focused components where performance is key, high volume external facing web services for example, I use something faster like SimpleInjector. However, I have time and again found it lacking when I need to do something more advanced, and end up replacing it eventually. As I adapt my methodologies to a micro-service style approach however, I have begun to see more value in smaller frameworks.
You would see a performance increase it sounds like with the type of volume you're seeing. But the perceived value of that performance increase is dependent entirely on how much value you place on flexibility and the other capabilities that Ninject Provides.
"Worth it" can only be decided by you. Have you run a profiler on your site to see where the worst bottlenecks are? It might not even be Ninject that's your worst offender.
Certainly, anywhere you can shave some time off will be worth it for many people. But a lot of it depends on your usage. For instance, if you're generally injecting only a few objects with a shallow dependency graph, you probably won't see much benefit. But, if you have deep dependency graphs with hundreds of objects, then you might see a lot of benefit.
SimpleInjector is not likely to be abandoned soon, as the primary developer is a well known guy.
StructureMap is another good choice, although it's middle of the pack in performance, it's well supported and has a good community.
Anybody wandering by this question again, might want to give DryIoC a try as well. Performance closer to SimpleInjector, but a bit more extensible. MS actually uses it for a few of their back end services, Azure Durable functions to name one.
These frameworks are the future of speed internet. But I can't find any benchmark or feature comparison of them on google. What framework in which situation would be better for example for building highload online shop? For building stackoverflow clone?
Maybe some basic memory management and request handling differences explanation, please?
Though the official documentation links to techempower, ChicagoBoss is not mentioned anywhere. Looking closely at ChicagoBoss it seems to be targeted mostly at Erlang developers, which is not the most popular language out there. I'm a fanatical about Phalcon, but I feel that ChicagoBoss would be faster and more resource efficient out of the box. But… writing your entire app in binary code right away would be even better in that sense.
Phalcon in less than two years achieved bigger popularity and reputation than ChicagoBoss did in five. There is significantly more information and support out there for Phalcon given all standard PHP rules and information apply to it as well. Phalcon next big release is under active development and looks very promising.
What framework in which situation would be better for example for
building highload online shop? For building stackoverflow clone?
I'm certain that neither Amazon or SO use either of them but both rely on a lot of caching and infrastructure optimisation to get where they are – the job for a different type framework.
Phalcon is a great lightweight tool for building unique projects with focus on high performance. It behaves very nicely with PhpStorm and the development / debugging is a pleasure most of the time. But be sure, it will give a lot of headache (there are a few bugs and some information is hard to come by) – isn't the best choice for enterprise software, you will spend a lot of time figuring out how things work and how to fix some of them.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 3 years ago.
Improve this question
So, I've got an idea for a website. I can start off using any platform and frameworks I want, but there are almost too many options.
OS Platform:
Windows, *nix
Web Framework:
Rails, ASP.NET, ASP.NET MVC, Django, Zend, Cake, others
Hosting:
EC2, Dedicated Server, Shared Hosting, VPS, App Engine, Azure, others
Persistence:
S3, MySql, PostreSql, Sql Server, SimpleDB, CouchDB, others
How do you avoid decision paralysis and get started?
Firstly, your familiarity with a framework's language should dictate which framework you choose. Don't add the burden of learning another language on top of learning a framework.
Next, have a look at the remaining frameworks. Do they have good documentation? What about the community. (A good community can go a long way to making up any shortcomings of a given technology.) Does the framework solve the problems that you need solved?
Finally, just dive in and try something! Pick the one that makes the most sense to you and start writing code. Don't do too much hand-wringing over your decision. If it becomes obvious that you made the wrong choice, it should be obvious quite early. Learn from what you've accomplished so far and consider restarting with a different technology. (Just don't get several weeks down the road before you make this decision!)
I'm sure you don't like all of those technologies equally. Pick a framework that you like and get to work.
It depends on what your app is going to be doing. A handful of the technologies you listed are direct competitors (like Django vs. Rails), but some are completely different ways to do things (like MySQL vs. S3).
Questions to answer before you begin:
Will the app need to be horizontally partitioned in the near term? If so, using EC2, Google App Engine or Azure would be a good option.
Will your app fit into the constraints of Google App Engine? If so, it requires a lot less hassle on your part than running on bare metal (whether real or virtual).
What's your preferred web framework? If you want an MS framework, you'll need to run on a host that supports that.
What will your persistence and data access patterns look like? This will determine whether to use a database or something more exotic.
If you are running on EC2, the other AWS services are more appealing. Similarly, if you are using GAE, you have only one option for persistence. If you are using Rails, may as well start with MySQL.
In answer to your question of how to reduce the number of options, the answer is to realize that many of the options are related, so you don't have as many choices to make as it first appears.
Some advice that was once given to me is, pick what your friends (or colleagues) are using. Having people around you that you can share ideas and the learning experience with is invaluable.
If you want to learn something new: I'd just go with your gut and get started. If it sucks then switch to something more familiar.
If you don't have much time: Go with what you know and forget about the other options. Just start coding.
Optimize for happiness. Pick the one that you like the most. Or the one that intrigues you the most.
I've worked in Microsoft shops, in Ruby on Rails, and in homegrown shops having Apache, Jetty, even Mason.
All frameworks have their warts, their idiosyncracies that will keep you up until 3 AM, and their "tribal knowledge" vagaries that will be completely unexportable to other frameworks. (The last point is sometimes by design, the whole "platform entrenchment" business strategy)
Listen to what the supporters of the frameworks say about the problems with the other frameworks (Google: X framework vs Y framework). Pick the framework that has the loudest supporters. If they are equally loud, make the decision with a dice roll.
With me it's simple.
I only know MS stack and see no point in "checking out" all of those you mentioned.
No, actually I once tried to use JSF before excluding it from my list permanently.
Use what you are experienced in and where you can be more productive. The objective is to get your site up and running. Go for it.
One of the biggest factors in determining which platform/framework to use is your budget. You have to factor in the cost of licensing, software required to develop/maintain your website and other miscellaneous costs.
I suggest you begin with a scorecard of your own construction. Perhaps you can find different ones on the web, but if you do, modify them to meet YOUR needs. There should be a scorecard for each level in the stack (as you've described). Each scorecard should share some aspects to grade with other scorecards but each will also have their unique aspects.
Once constructed, weight each aspect graded according to your needs.
Once you've chosen the weights, pick the scales for grades.
At this point promise yourself you wont mess with the weights or the scale and then start collecting data on your options for each level in the stack.
You may also want to put a time limit on the collection period.
Make your decision based on the outcome of the scorecard.
The beauty of this approach is that the effort is made in constructing the scorecard, not in circular arguments of options. The effort in making the scorecard is vendor agnostic and focuses on the desired result, not the options. Thus you can avoid paralysis.
One more thing, my best scorecards have included sections addressing the availability of resources and other human related things. Don't make the mistake of just looking at the technology.
good luck.
Go for personal preferences.
One decision at a time:
Firts I would begin with type of language:
Script: PHP, Python,
Serious: Java, .Net
The language will restrict your OS, plattform and will give you hints for the dataabse decission. The database load is also important. And, Do you want logic in the DDBB? how much data?
Last advice. Try combinations well tested. LAMP, WAMP, Windows with SQL Server and .NET.
Evaluate each platform and technology for quality of tools for your needs. For example, if you are cost sensitive, you would value free operating systems and tools higher than costly ones. If you need performance, you would value tools which provide high performance higher than ones that don't.
It entirely depends on your situation. I spent several months evaluating stuff for a new commercial web site last year, and it was very easy to feel paralized. In the end it was talking to several people who'd done similar things, and of course reading a lot of stuff online and from Amazon. I chose Java, since our team had a lot of experience in it, and it has good performance and extensive supporting technologies. Oracle is our database but we used a persistence manager to make it easy to change later on. We used a half-dozen very good libraries to eliminate much of the boring and repetitive coding (Restlet, iBatis, Freemarker, XStream, jQuery, SLF4J). We used Glassfish as our web server.
Yours sounds like a small project with only you to work on it. In that case, pick a complete framework instead of a smorgasbord like we did. Pick something fun to work with, and something with good "return on resume". Look very hard at Ruby on Rails, Django (kind of a Python on Rails), and Groovy on Grails (a Rails-wannabe for the Java world). In your shoes I'd pick Ruby on Rails because there's a large and growing community and a good number of books and tutorials. Plus, Ruby looks like a worthwhile language to learn. For your database, just pick one. These frameworks make it easy to change your mind later. Pick MySQL unless you have another you like better.
And as other posters said, just do it! ;-)
Like others said, pick something you and your employees are familiar with. I highly doubt you are close to being industry ready with all those techs.
OS Platform: Windows, *nix
Shouldn't matter except for Windows licensing costs, and that is probably the least of your expenses.
Web Framework: Rails, ASP.NET, ASP.NET MVC, Django, Zend, Cake, others
Dependent on your favorite language
Hosting: EC2, Dedicated Server, Shared Hosting, VPS, App Engine, Azure, others
You should design your product to be movable, so you can scale among these. If you know for sure you are going big, then just start off with EC2. App Engine is extremely limiting, ex. they don't let you form outbound connections.
Persistence: S3, MySql, PostreSql, Sql Server, SimpleDB, CouchDB, others
You need to do the research yourself whether or not your product requires an RDBMS or a simple key/value store, and what features each of these have.
Just go for it! Your platform choice really is not all that important as long as you make a reasonable choice (Ruby + Rails, Python + Django, PHP + Cake/CodeIgniter). Any of these can be used to build successful sites. If your site really takes off, you'll be able to scale it fine.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm facing developing a new web app in the future and I'm wondering how to decide what framework to use. I've settled on Python as my language of choice. But there are still may frameworks to choose from! More generally how do you choose between different similar technologies that are still in the works as the latest round of web frameworks are? I'm curious what your process is for deciding on technologies you've never used.
Recognize that no choice is perfect -- or even very good.
No matter what you choose, someone will have a suggestion that -- they claim -- is better.
No matter what you choose, some part of your tech. stack will fail to live up to your expectations.
The most important thing is "shared nothing" so that the components can be replaced.
After that, the next most important thing is automatically-generated features to reduce or prevent programming.
Look at Django. Lots of automatic admin features make life very pleasant.
There are a number of things you can do:
Download the frameworks and build something similar with them for comparison.
Look for comparisons by other people, but attempt to understand the bias of the reviewer.
Observe the community at work, see what people are building and the issues they run into when using the technology. Forums, blogs, mailing list etc are good places to check out.
Go to conferences and meet like minded developers interested.
You can also take the approach of using stable versions rather than alpha bits. After a while you might move closer the bleeding edge. People associated with the project in question are generally more biased than those approaching from other platforms, be careful who you trust.
Consider the impact of using a bleeding edge framework versus an established one. Sometimes it's important to your customers that you are on one perceived as stable. At other times this doesn't matter. How comfortable are you with fixing the framework itself? Great developers will learn the internals, or at least know enough to keep things moving whilst a bug is sent to the framework mailing list etc.
Consider some general best practices in building abstractions and reusable code on the python platform. You may be able to save yourself some work in moving to another platform. However, don't be a reuse junkie as this can limit the effectiveness of your use of the framework. The 37Signals guys are right when they talk about extracting frameworks from working code rather than building frameworks from scratch.
I know this is an old posting, but I am in a similar situation (again) and I think there are other people who may want to look for different opinions, and hear of (somewhat) successful experiences.
Since baudtack mentioned Python, I will try to answer this along the lines of my experiences using Python. Here is what has been working for me:
determine the scope of your project - outlining what your application is supposed to be able to do without introducing any programming or design notes will clarify your goals greatly
determine how you would like to work with your code, stack and data:
a. what sort of programming paradigm do you want to work with? i.e. object-oriented, functional, etc. do you want to play to your programming style or do you want to follow somebody else's programming style?
b. use semantic web or not? do you want greater control over URIs and their design? (I found web.py great for this by the way - It is my choice to create REST APIs in Python)
c. do you want to be trapped by framework requirements, or do you want a better separation of the application from the web component, i.e. use a framework to utilize your application as a set of modules, for example. My problem with Django was that I ended up not programming Python, but having to learn more Django than I needed to. If that works for you, then that is the way to go.
d. data stores... some sort of SQL vs. non RDBMS (xml databases like eXist-db with full xquery support) vs. OODBMS vs. a combination of the above? how complicated do you need this to be? how much control/separation do you need to have over how data gets stored and recalled in your application?
e. testing: unit tests... thank goodness for python! if your web app has the potential to grow (as they often do), having a sane and coherent testing platform to begin with will help out a lot in the future - I wish I had learned about this earlier on. oh well... better late than never.
f. how much control over the server do you need? hosting considerations? how much control over an Apache instance do you need to have? OS specific needs? I found that using shared hosting providers like Webfaction has been great. I eventually found I needed greater needs for flexibility and bandwidth. In other words, what can you get for your budget? If you have USD50 to spend each month, it may be better to consider a virtual hosting solution like Linode....
Finally, I echo S.Lott's sentiments that no choice for a solution is perfect, and are subject to obsolescence.
Experience trumps hearsay. I've found that prototyping is a huge help. Make a prototype that uses the features you expect to be the most important for various frameworks. This helps route out any features that may not work "as advertised."
In general though, kudos for being willing to look at new technologies.
I have a set of criteria in different categories:
Activity & Documentation
Is there an active user base?
Is there an active development base?
Is the support responsive and information accessible?
Are there user and development guides and reference material?
These are essential, there needs to be traceability of all of these to build confidence in the solution.
Ease of use
Are basic features easy and complex features possible? I typically give a new framework a test drive and try to roll out a set of use cases to see how intuitive the framework is to use.
Is installation intuitive and simple for a local/dev installation and production deployment?
How is it backed up and upgraded?
What is the effort and UX for implementing a "Hello World" type blog post, static page, menu item, and plugin?
How are versions dealt with for the core & plugins?
Example (on the topic of Automated Testing/Continuous Integration solutions)
Several years ago I evaluated several Automated Testing solution. At the time Jenkins and TeamCity were front runners and in the end I chose TeamCity because of the UX, active user & development base and quality of accessible documentation.
Example (CMS for a blog)
This criteria is also why I prefer to use Wordpress over other options. While wordpress has its shortcomings, the user and development base is strong and active which leads to a software architecture with more potential to evolve over time and maintain its relevance and a development community that provides quality plugins and themes to choose from.
Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
We are looking at hiring a software development project manager. His job is going to be concerned with running multiple dedicated project teams focused on delivery of software for external customers. He will also need to provide support to our business development unit and oversee post-implementations support of the aforementioned software. What level of hands on development experience should we expect from the applicants? Successful candidate is not expected to do any coding.
Not important. We should be focused on proven project management experience in software area.
None.
Some experience, exact technology does not matter.
Heavy experience, exact technology does not matter.
Some experience involving same acronyms as we use daily over here.
Heavy experience involving same acronyms as we use daily over here.
Some experience, mostly with technologies we do not use.
Heavy experience, mostly with technologies we do not use.
This question is regarding the best level and quality of required technical experience and is not concerned with any other skills and qualifications of a software project manager. Many thanks.
As with any position, you need to assess first and foremost what skills and experience you need on the team for you to be successful. Then hire to fill the gap for the skills that you do not already have on your team.
If you already have a team with strong technical and technical leadership skills then you don't need to hire someone who is likely to compete with the people you already have. If you are missing this, you probably want to hire a technical manager with some project planning and tracking skills.
Great project managers are those that are multidisciplinary - they are most successful where they can bridge the divide between the various stakeholders and team. The primary role of the project manager is to manage risk and facilitate communication and collaboration. As a minimum, you should look for someone that has proven experience in either your industry or with the technology space that you are playing in, otherwise they will be unable to gain the respect of the rest of the team and perform their primary role.
Which brings me to something else you should consider carefully - what is your culture? For example in a previous job, we had development leads that were very strong technically and wilful. Project managers were always relegated to second chair, and pretty much ended up as glorified MS Project admin. assistants. Anyone good did not stay long. What do you need to do to allow the type of skills you want to acquire for the team to flourish?
Most of our project managers have zero technical experience, so I'm guessing the skill sets are different enough that it's not necessary. However, they have to be bright enough to grasp/learn the concepts involved in development -- just not the implementation.
That's not to say that a technical background would be a bad thing -- it could be a "nice to have". Then again, it could possibly get in the way and they could try to control the implementation.
In my experience the very best technical managers I've had had very strong technical backgrounds (and usually were a little reluctant to trade herding code for herding coders). The worst were the the ones that were merely average programmers at best and had more of a management background.
The tentative conclusion I've drawn from this is that while not all programmers are management material, all good technical managers started out as good programmers.
Note that this answer is coming more from the perspective of hiring an engineering lead. For a project manager - someone whose job is to interface between the technical people and the customer - technical acuity is probably less of a requirement.
Some technical skill would be nice, but far more important is that they understand the functional area your company exists in. So if you sell an OS, then you probably want stronger technical skills than if you're writing banking software, for example.
Go with point 1. "Not important. We should be focused on proven project management experience in software area."
Edit: (after re-reading your intro-para) Seems what you want is a product-manager, and in support you need team-leaders on the diverse teams to handle and report on the technical issues. (Also since customer-contact is involved: a little marketing experience won't hurt!)
As an aside:
You are focusing on the wrong skill-set. You want proven administrative skill; proven organizational skill; and above all: proven people skills - (s)he must be able to communicate without antagonizing or patronizing the audience. The technical staff and programming staff will have all the necessary experience in development. (S)He must be able to manage and control these staff members effectitively.
The manager has to be able to communicate with developers. This either requires a decent technical background, although not necessarily with the same technology, or enough humility to know when the developers know more about something than the manager. I've seen both work well.
I think what I'm saying is that having respect for the developers is important, and there's two paths to it: understanding what they do, or understanding that you don't understand what they do.
Answer is "4".
Heavy experience with some technology is critical. I know the mindset is "project manager does not have to understand technology, he just manages people".
Well no, PM does not manage people: he manages project that is supposed to produce some deliverable that is acceptable at least across some desired aspects (capability, performance, reliability, security, maintainability, etc). If he can't understand technology, he's lost. Of course, he does not have to be an expert in peculiar technologies used in a project: but he has to be able to filter BS away, to question programmer's estimates (we know how those go), to feel at least technical risk here or there, to be able to formulate business ramifications of particular technologies.
In some ways I think that PM's challenges re technology are even bigger than those of programmer: he has to be genuinely interested in technology, yet he can't / should not have any technology bigotry, to be actually fair towards them (what they are actually good for and what they are actually not good for).
Read "In search of stupidity" for evidence how non-technical managers drove many tech companies into the ground.
This is excellent summary by Spolsky: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Stupidity.html
Now, the small print #1: not every programmer will make a good PM, of course. In short, control freaks, toxic personalities, egomaniacs, people who are good at coding but not at negotiating, people who are good at coding but yield to pressure too easily -- will FUBR their projects.
Small print #2: It might be possible that people with very good analytical skills might make up for lack of experience with technology. I've worked with people who were excellent business process and procedure designers, who instinctively understood how UI should be organized and what the software should be doing in this particular place and why and who could detect BS quickly even when served by domain experts but who could not program if their life depended on it.
Most has been answered already, but I'll add this:
Keep the same mindset that you would have when hiring an office manager. While the technology knowledge is important, you'll find that ambition, a will to learn, coupled with a team leader attitude will get you a better manager than looking at mostly technology knowledge. Most projects have some company/industry-specific skills that are involved and a quick learner / great leader will bridge that gap quickly.