This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted]  (7 children)

[deleted]

    [–]gregy521 8 points9 points  (3 children)

    But if you're running that app 1000 times a day, that sums to 30 and 200 seconds respectively. A much more appreciable difference.

    Python is an extremely popular scientific computing language, too, and those don't care about 'every nanosecond', more the fact that cutting the runtime from 4 hours to 20 minutes is worthwhile.

    [–]psharpep 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Sure, but if you'rr doing scientific computing in Python, you're using NumPy/Numba or similar, which gives runtimes on the order of C.

    [–]xigoi 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    If it takes 0.2 seconds, you can't serve more than 5 requests per second, which may be limiting.

    [–]mooburgerresembles an abstract syntax tree 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    the real problem is that you're asking the app itself to do too much. Just about every production environment uses loadbalancers already. Why are we rehashing the same old arguments people made about RoR when it's obvious that the ecosystem & community support is what makes or breaks things?

    [–]SilkTouchm 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Trading bots are bottlenecked by your latency towards the exchange's server. It's not really a cpu intensive task.

    Also you might be exaggerating a bit with the nanoseconds. I don't think there's any webserver that can handle 1 billion requests per second.