Perl web framework comparison: any two, head to head
feersum is quicker than mojolicious on 11 of the 11 profiles they both run. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 402 and 4811.
Pick any two of the 2 Perl entries. Requests per second is the best of three runs and the delta is the first column against the second; every row is the same profile at the same connection count, on the same machine. What each profile measures.
| Profile | Conns | mojolicious req/sec | feersum req/sec | Delta | mojolicious p99 | feersum p99 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 4,096 | 68,123 | 2,074,092 | -97% | 172.90ms | 4.56ms |
| Pipelined | 4,096 | 72,483 | 3,641,519 | -98% | 1.69s | 35.10ms |
| Short-lived | 4,096 | 64,432 | 1,832,611 | -96% | 129.00ms | 5.60ms |
| Async Delay | 32,000 | 67,780 | 1,932,947 | -96% | 680.10ms | 20.90ms |
| Latency-10K | 1,024 | 9,977 | 9,984 | -0% | 2583.0us | 112.0us |
| Latency-1M | 1,024 | 64,235 | 997,610 | -94% | 18522112.0us | 246.0us |
| Latency-500K/8 | 1,024 | 8,951 | 341,457 | -97% | 19423232.0us | 7604224.0us |
| JSON Comp | 4,096 | 17,750 | 369,061 | -95% | 1.52s | 25.50ms |
| JSON Comp | 16,384 | 16,175 | 363,387 | -96% | 2.42s | 71.40ms |
| JSON TLS | 4,096 | 12,699 | 918,913 | -99% | 272.21ms | 41.00ms |
| 8Gbit | 512 | 46,385 | 49,333 | -6% | 6218.0us | 131.0us |
Common comparisons
Questions
Is mojolicious faster than feersum?
feersum is quicker than mojolicious on 11 of the 11 profiles they both run. On the HTTP/1.1 composite they score 402 and 4811. Both run on the same machine, in the same round, against the same profiles.
Which Perl framework is fastest overall?
feersum holds the highest HTTP/1.1 composite of the Perl entries, at 4811. The composite is throughput over the whole suite; if a service is one shape of workload, compare that profile on its own in the table above, because the order changes.
Every Perl entry
Results updated · Perl composite ranking · Compare across languages · Other languages · Open the leaderboard