[erlang-questions] Erlang is the best choice for building commercial application servers

[Max Bourinov]

Akka has very flashy statements on its website [1].

I want to mention that some very important aspects (like gc, memory
allocation etc.) are not covered on [1]. Yeah, it is JVM and we all know
how it will work. Makes no sense to expect something new there :-)

So, I believe that 2.1 million messages in Akka [2] and 1 Million in Erlang
are absolutely different messages.

---
 1. http://akka.io/
 2. http://letitcrash.com/post/14783691760/akka-vs-erlang

Best regards,
Max




On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 8:36 AM, envelopes envelopes
<sunwood360@REDACTED>wrote:

> According to this blog, Akka seems better /close performance when compared
> to Erlang.
>
> http://letitcrash.com/post/14783691760/akka-vs-erlang
>
> ".... Erlang R14B04 did *1 million* messages per second while Akka
> 2.0-SNAPSHOT did *2.1 million* per second..."
>
> this one also has some interesting results:
>    https://plus.google.com/u/0/112820434312193778084/posts/HdKFx4VQtJj
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 6:38 PM, Miles Fidelman <
> mfidelman@REDACTED> wrote:
>
>> Maybe this is obvious, but seems to me that running a concurrency engine
>> on top of a JVM just adds a layer of unnecessary overhead.
>>
>>
>> Ngoc Dao wrote:
>>
>>> The result of Erlang vs Java is obvious.
>>> But how about Erlang vs Scala (with Akka, http://akka.io/)?
>>>
>>>
>>>  Joe pointed to a very important fact, Java/J2ee is industry (so is c#
>>>> and
>>>> .net) but Erlnag is a language.
>>>>   Each time I have to look at a WSDL or XML schema to fix a production
>>>> bug
>>>> in a J2ee application is I ask why Erlang shouldn't be industry? Just
>>>> compare the simplicity and in particular the beauty of distributed
>>>> Erlang
>>>> with awkwardness of webservice / JMS communications. Quite frankly
>>>> folks,
>>>> they are really ugly! So are their .net siblings. This is not because I
>>>> love
>>>> Erlang, I just follow the same sense of beauty that guided
>>>> mathematicians
>>>> and theoretical physicists for years when they come up with innovative
>>>> ideas. As Hardy used to say "There is no place for ugly mathematics".
>>>> Why IT
>>>> is missing (or ignoring) such a sense? I don't think what we do is more
>>>> abstract than pure math (Manifold theory for instance). Maybe because
>>>> IT is
>>>> too young but still we need to start sometime from somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Shahrdad
>>>>
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/**listinfo/erlang-questions<http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
>> In practice, there is.   .... Yogi Berra
>>
>>
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/**listinfo/erlang-questions<http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list
> erlang-questions@REDACTED
> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20120314/e20b5408/attachment.htm>