之前一直在用gunicorn，这次折腾新项目突发奇想来对比下flask run \gunicorn\uwsgi的性能。不是非常严谨的测试，希望也能有一定的参考意义，结果也很有意思。
gunicorn很火，uwsgi以前用的人多，但是现在少了感觉不怎么听到，这东西是用c写的，带了光环的。flask run这里只是作为基准参考，压力测试工具为ab test,前置了nginx把静态文件剥离了，两者都使用unix domain socket通信隔离了http微乎其微的影响，两者都是用了2process+2thread，压力为100-1000。下面是三种方式的结果：
#基准flask run 100-1000
Server Software: nginx
Server Hostname: xxx
Server Port: 443
SSL/TLS Protocol: TLSv1.2,ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384,2048,256
Document Path: /
Document Length: 6223 bytes
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 7.418 seconds
Complete requests: 1000
Failed requests: 0
Total transferred: 6489000 bytes
HTML transferred: 6223000 bytes
Requests per second: 134.81 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 741.790 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 7.418 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 854.27 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 5 47 69.2 6 296
Processing: 231 662 186.7 679 1736
Waiting: 231 662 186.7 679 1736
Total: 241 709 159.6 702 1742
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 702
66% 735
75% 788
80% 821
90% 881
95% 958
98% 1111
99% 1178
100% 1742 (longest request)
# uwsgi result
Server Software: nginx
Server Hostname: erp.ljmold.cn
Server Port: 443
SSL/TLS Protocol: TLSv1.2,ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384,2048,256
Document Path: /user/login
Document Length: 6223 bytes
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 9.741 seconds
Complete requests: 1000
Failed requests: 0
Total transferred: 6489000 bytes
HTML transferred: 6223000 bytes
Requests per second: 102.66 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 974.096 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 9.741 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 650.54 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 5 130 246.7 9 1750
Processing: 4 533 732.3 437 7584
Waiting: 4 533 732.3 437 7584
Total: 9 664 765.4 473 7742
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 473
66% 656
75% 751
80% 858
90% 1272
95% 1719
98% 2526
99% 4081
100% 7742 (longest request)
#gunicorn 100-1000
Server Software: nginx
Server Hostname: erp.ljmold.cn
Server Port: 443
SSL/TLS Protocol: TLSv1.2,ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384,2048,256
Document Path: /user/login
Document Length: 6223 bytes
Concurrency Level: 100
Time taken for tests: 9.678 seconds
Complete requests: 1000
Failed requests: 0
Total transferred: 6489000 bytes
HTML transferred: 6223000 bytes
Requests per second: 103.33 [#/sec] (mean)
Time per request: 967.779 [ms] (mean)
Time per request: 9.678 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests)
Transfer rate: 654.79 [Kbytes/sec] received
Connection Times (ms)
min mean[+/-sd] median max
Connect: 4 82 233.2 6 2275
Processing: 4 584 891.2 306 7272
Waiting: 4 584 891.4 303 7272
Total: 10 667 907.5 389 7278
Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms)
50% 389
66% 573
75% 682
80% 868
90% 1487
95% 2506
98% 3374
99% 4788
100% 7278 (longest request)
总共耗时上差的微乎其微，这点差别不能说明什么；两者都完成了所有请求，这里说一下，之所以选1000就是因为2000两种方式都会崩溃；平均时间uwsgi胜出，这里差别不明显，但是也说明总体性能上uwsgi做的彻底；连接时间上，两者明显在1000下都吃力了，但是uwsgi表现更好，除了c我觉得使用uwsgi自己的协议也有关系；最后也是最重要的，在高并发下，明显uwsgi的表现更好一点，很有意思的是在80%以下的正常流量范围内反倒gunicorn更好，而且效果显著，100ms还是比较可观的，我想这才是大家都用gunicorn的主要原因吧。
最后别人说的总归是片面，还是自己动手对性能有更全面的了解。顺便说一下对flask自带的小服务器刮目相看
Post Views: 7,232